18200 From: Date: Thu Dec 26, 2002 5:01am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Dhamma Issues, Ch 2, Fruition-attainment, no 1 Hi - In a message dated 12/26/02 12:37:09 PM Eastern Standard Time, nidive@y... writes: > Dear Howard, > > >Okay. My point was that jhana or anything else is nothing beyond > >its aspects/characteristics. You seem to be accepting that in this > >post. > > No, you are mistaken. > > Consider the characteristics of nibbana described by the Buddha in > these sample suttas from AccessToInsight: > > "This is peace, this is exquisite -- the resolution of all > fabrications, the relinquishment of all acquisitions, the ending of > craving; dispassion; cessation; Nibbana." > -- AN III.32 > > "There is that dimension where there is neither earth, nor water, > nor fire, nor wind; neither dimension of the infinitude of space, > nor dimension of the infinitude of consciousness, nor dimension of > nothingness, nor dimension of neither perception nor non-perception; > neither this world, nor the next world, nor sun, nor moon. And > there, I say, there is neither coming, nor going, nor stasis; > neither passing away nor arising: without stance, without > foundation, without support [mental object]. This, just this, is the > end of stress." > -- Ud VIII.1 > > "There is, monks, an unborn -- unbecome -- unmade -- unfabricated. > If there were not that unborn -- unbecome -- unmade -- unfabricated, > there would not be the case that emancipation from the born -- > become -- made -- fabricated would be discerned. But precisely > because there is an unborn -- unbecome -- unmade -- unfabricated, > emancipation from the born -- become -- made -- fabricated is > discerned." > ------------------------------------------------ Howard: All the foregoing is a mere "pointing at", and not a listing of characteristics. Nibbana is asankhata, and an alleged ascription of characteristics is not an actual ascription of characteristics. What the Buddha is doing there is the best that can be done with language with respect to nibbana, a mere pointing. Nibbana is, after all, an absence - the absence of the three poisons and of dukkha. An absence is a thing with properties only linguistically, and not in reality. What color is the unicorn that is not in my room? ----------------------------------------------- > > > Questions... > > (1) Why have you not realized nibbana given the characteristics of > nibbana? > > (2) If you have not realized nibbana, then is the descriptions of the > characteristics of nibbana given by the Buddha incomplete? > > (3) If it is incomplete, how do we know that the "nibbana" that we > know is the same as that known by the Buddha? > > (4) If it is complete, why haven't you realized nibbana? After all, > nibbana is nothing beyond what the Buddha had described. > > (5) What is the cause of characteristics? Does a ball know that it > is round? Does nibbana know that it is anatta? What is a > characteristic other than it is mind-made? > > (6) If a characteristic is mind-made, then a characteristic must be > impermanent. If a characteristic is impermanent (existing only > as being sustained by the mind), the characteristic must come to > cease (pass away). If nibbana is nothing beyond its > characteristics and all characteristics must come to cease > (pass away), nibbana must come to cease (pass away) as well. > > (7) If nibbana must come to cease (pass away), how do I understand > the characteristic of nibbana which is "neither passing away > nor arising"? > --------------------------------------------------- Howard: Answers ... (1) I have already replied with regard to the "characteristics" of nibbana. Moreover, knowing conceptually a list of the characteristics of a thing is not the same as direct apprehension. (2), (3), and (4) are unanswerable given the answer to (1). (5) and (6): I don't know what you mean here by "mind-made". If you mean concept-only, then no. (7) Who claims that nibbana must "come to cease"? Not I. ------------------------------------------------------- > > > >You are close to showing in this post, by analysis of > >characteristics, that what is normally called "jhana" is subsumed > >and superceded by supermundane path consciousness. To me, this > >makes supermundane path consciousness "jhana plus". > > No, not so. Your analysis is likened to holding a wedding banquet > when there isn't a bride and a groom. > ------------------------------------------- Howard: Well, I hope the food is good! ------------------------------------------- > > > Regards, > NEO Swee Boon > > ========================= With metta, Howard /Thus is how ye shall see all this fleeting world: A star at dawn, a bubble in a stream, a flash of lightning in a summer cloud, a flickering lamp, a phantom, and a dream./ (From the Diamond Sutra) 18201 From: nina van gorkom Date: Thu Dec 26, 2002 10:04am Subject: Re: [dsg] Dhamma Issues,Qu on Fruition-attainment Dear Howard, see below. op 24-12-2002 19:17 schreef upasaka@a... op upasaka@a...: As to: >> The conclusion regarding the issue of analysis: The ariyan who has not >> attained jhåna is not able to enter fruition attainment. ======================= > Exactly what is meant by "attained jhana"? Is it not so that path > consciousness is attained at least the level of the first jhana? Henepola > Gunaratana has written the following... Nina: I appreciate it that you studied this issue and gave it considerable thought. What you say about calm with lokuttara citta is quite right. This is mentioned at the end of the issue, as you will see. It is at the conclusion, but I shall now quote it: Jhana-factors here means: developed by the practice of samatha. As you will see from the parts that follow, many sources are used for this issue. It was difficult to translate, because many texts do not exist in English. I hope Num and Kom will help when you and others ask questions. Half a minute after I had met Num in Bgk, for the first time, waiting for the van to go to Kraeng Kacang, we dived into this text and immediately he phoned Kh Krisna, his aunt. She takes part in the weekly committee meetings where all the texts are prepared and gives an important imput there. She is very kind and said she will help again via Num. Just recently another booklet came out on the latent tendencies. Nina. 18202 From: nina van gorkom Date: Thu Dec 26, 2002 10:04am Subject: Re: [dsg] Way 28,the three characteristics, stages of insight Dear Victor and Sarah, see below. op 24-12-2002 20:59 schreef yu_zhonghao op yu_zhonghao@y...: > Hi Nina and all, > >> From what you wrote, I don't see that you really explained how the > understanding that hardness is not seeing relates to the > understanding that each and every aggregate is impermanent, > unsatisfactory, not self. > > Could you explain it in a more concise language? I like the way Sarah explained it and I quote: I like Sarah's post with additional comments and quotes from other commentaries. Sarah, I do not have Ven. Bodhi's translations, and if you have time I appreciate it very much if you can give more details. I heard on a tape that A. Sujin said to Rob K: in the words clear comprehension (in Thai ru chad) are included the development of panna going through all the stages of insight. Thus, it is a matter of development, not pariyatti, theoretical understanding, but patipatti, practice, so that finally panna of pativeda (direct realization) can be reached. When we read suttas we may not distinguish these three levels of panna. We can get some benefit from theoretical understanding, but we do not profit to the full if we do not develop satipatthana, awareness of this very moment. Nina. 18203 From: nina van gorkom Date: Thu Dec 26, 2002 10:04am Subject: Re: [dsg] Patience, o patience Dear Sarah, Your reminders are very helpful, and also repeating this once more for me. Instead of anger, dosa, we can also think of aversion or sadness. But when we are sad because of what somone else said to us, it seems that we are at such moments not openminded to these reminders, even though we read them or type them out. Lack of satipatthana, the conditions are not right. But later on, conditions change again. Thank you, with appreciation, Nina. P.S. I also appreciate very much Beth's quote, because it is "my own" akusala when I am dismayed or sad, I better be aware of the citta at that moment: Let none find fault with others; let none see the omissions and commissions of others. But let one see one's own acts, done and undone. Dhammapada 4:50 This is very deep in meaning, Beth. We can have theoretical understanding of it, that is, we think about our faults, the story. It does make a difference if sati sampajanna (sati and panna) can arise right at that moment. It can realize akusala as akusala. Or, on the level of satipatthana, sati sampajanna realizes at that moment the characteristic of the dhamma that appears, without having to think about it. It can be realized as only a conditioned nama, not self. It depends on conditions what level of understanding arises. With satipatthana the deepest meaning of what the Buddha taught can be understood. We learn that the Dhamma is subtle and deep, difficult to understand. It takes so long to develop satipatthana, but it is good to realize what we do not understand yet. It is good to know that by just reading and considering we have not understood the teachings yet. Reading and considering are conditions for the arising of sati sampajanna. Nina. op 25-12-2002 11:15 schreef Sarah op sarahdhhk@y...: > K.Sujin: “Whoever may have done wrong to us or may have harmed us, his > deeds have ceased at that moment, and therefore we should not continue to > be angry”. > ..... > Commentary: “With whom, then, should you now be angry, and by whom should > anger be aroused? When all phenomena are non-self, who can do wrong to > whom? 18204 From: nina van gorkom Date: Thu Dec 26, 2002 10:04am Subject: Dhamma Issues, Fruition Attainment 2 Dhamma Issues, Fruition Attainment 2 2: The Visuddhimagga, Ch XXIII, Description of the Benefits in Developing Understanding (explaining who can enter fruition attainment and who cannot) states: ³All ariyans can enter fruition-attainment². This is a conclusion which refutes an argument of some teachers who had wrong view. They stated that the sotåpanna (streamwinner) and the sakadågåmí (once-returner) are not able to enter fruition-attainment, and that only the anågåmí (non-returner) and the arahat could enter fruition-attainment. They argued that only the anågåmí and the arahat could reach accomplishment in samådhi (concentration). However, even the ordinary person (who is not an ariyan) may reach accomplishment in samådhi, so that he may enter mundane jhåna-attainment, jhåna-samåpatti (5. Thus, all ariyans, namely, the sotåpanna, the sakadågåmí, the anågåmí and the arahat can enter fruition-attainment, provided they are able to attain jhåna. The Paramatthadípaní, Commentary to the Udåna, Khuddaka Nikåya, in the Commentary to Ch 1, Enlightenment explains the term vimutti sukha, the enjoyment of the happiness of freedom of the Buddha after his enlightenment. (6 We read in the ³Middle Length Sayings² (I, 44), ³The Lesser Discourse of the Miscellany² (Cúlavadallasutta) that the nun Dhammadinnå spoke with the layfollower Visåkha about the abiding in fruition-attainment, explaining cetovimutti, deliverance of mind (7. Thus, only the ariyan with jhåna-attainment can enter fruition-attainment. Footnotes: 5. Evenso, all ariyans who have accumulated the inclination to and the skill in the development of samatha, can attain jhåna. 6. See the Translation by P. Masefield, p. 58-62, ³But in the present case it is the Lord¹s liberation in terms of fruition that has nibbåna as its object that is implied, for which reason ³Experiencing the bliss of liberation (vimuttisukhapaìisaÿvedí) means: (he) was seated experiencing the bliss of liberation, the bliss associated with fruition-attainment²... The Buddha had attained all stages of rúpa-jhåna and arúpa-jhåna. 7. Ceto-vimutti refers to a person who has developed insight and samatha to the degree of jhåna. Dhammadinnå explains about the attainment of cessation of perception and feeling, which can be reached only by a person with jhåna attainment. 18205 From: Date: Thu Dec 26, 2002 5:11am Subject: Re: [dsg] Dhamma Issues,Qu on Fruition-attainment Wonderful, Nina! You have told me what was needed to answer my question. (I suspected I could count on you! ;-) With metta, Howard In a message dated 12/26/02 1:07:31 PM Eastern Standard Time, nilo@e... writes: > Dear Howard, see below. > op 24-12-2002 19:17 schreef upasaka@a... op upasaka@a...: > > As to: > >>The conclusion regarding the issue of analysis: The ariyan who has not > >>attained jhåna is not able to enter fruition attainment. > ======================= > >Exactly what is meant by "attained jhana"? Is it not so that path > >consciousness is attained at least the level of the first jhana? Henepola > >Gunaratana has written the following... > Nina: I appreciate it that you studied this issue and gave it considerable > thought. What you say about calm with lokuttara citta is quite right. This > is mentioned at the end of the issue, as you will see. It is at the > conclusion, but I shall now quote it: > magga-citta arises there is a high degree of calm with absorption which can > be compared to the calm of the first stage of jhåna. One might therefore > conclude that afterwards he is likely to be able to enter > fruition-attainment with phala-citta accompanied by factors of the first > jhåna (pathama jhånika phala). However, we should consider the following: > it > is true that the magga-citta of the ariyan without jhåna-attainment has > calm > with absorption equal to the tranquillity of the first jhåna, but this is > because nibbåna is the object at that moment. Since he is without jhåna > attainment and he has lokuttara citta without jhåna factors, samådhi, > concentration, has not sufficient strength so that the citta with strong > absorption in the object of nibbåna could arise again after he attained > enlightenment and became an ariyan.> > Jhana-factors here means: developed by the practice of samatha. > As you will see from the parts that follow, many sources are used for this > issue. It was difficult to translate, because many texts do not exist in > English. I hope Num and Kom will help when you and others ask questions. > Half a minute after I had met Num in Bgk, for the first time, waiting for > the van to go to Kraeng Kacang, we dived into this text and immediately he > phoned Kh Krisna, his aunt. She takes part in the weekly committee meetings > where all the texts are prepared and gives an important imput there. She is > very kind and said she will help again via Num. Just recently another > booklet came out on the latent tendencies. > Nina. > > /Thus is how ye shall see all this fleeting world: A star at dawn, a bubble in a stream, a flash of lightning in a summer cloud, a flickering lamp, a phantom, and a dream./ (From the Diamond Sutra) 18206 From: nidive Date: Thu Dec 26, 2002 10:20am Subject: [dsg] Re: Dhamma Issues, Ch 2, Fruition-attainment, no 1 Hi Howard, > All the foregoing is a mere "pointing at", and not a listing of > characteristics. Nibbana is asankhata, and an alleged ascription > of characteristics is not an actual ascription of characteristics. > What the Buddha is doing there is the best that can be done with > language with respect to nibbana, a mere pointing. Nibbana is, > after all, an absence - the absence of the three poisons and of > dukkha. An absence is a thing with properties only linguistically, > and not in reality. What color is the unicorn that is not in my > room? Then please enlighten me on the characteristics of nibbana. I take it that anatta is not a characteristic of nibbana then, since all alleged descriptions of the characteristic of nibbana are not 'actual descriptions'. NEO Swee Boon 18207 From: James Date: Thu Dec 26, 2002 11:05am Subject: [dsg] Re: Dhamma Issues, Ch 2, Fruition-attainment, no 1 --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "nidive " wrote: > > Then please enlighten me on the characteristics of nibbana. > I take it that anatta is not a characteristic of nibbana then, since > all alleged descriptions of the characteristic of nibbana are > not 'actual descriptions'. > > NEO Swee Boon Hi NEO, I am not Howard, but if I may jump in. I have little to do today! :-) Does Nibbana have the characteristic of Anatta? No. Nibbana doesn't have any definable characteristics...including non-self. Nibbana is indefinable because nibbana is release from all of the clung-to aggregates and any definitions come from mental formations (thoughts), which is one of the aggregates, so any definition from the mind cannot describe something that is foreign to the mind. Definable charactersitics come from thoughts, but nibbana is non- thought; so it cannot be defined or described. However, since the five aggregates are caused by fermentations, and fermentations are defined as something that is agitated, an approximate description for Nibbana would be `profound calm'. Metta, James 18208 From: christine_forsyth Date: Thu Dec 26, 2002 11:53am Subject: Significant Event Hi Sarah and Jon, and fellow dsg-ers, Just wanted to draw your attention to a significant event happening on 28 December. Dhamma Study Group will have its third birthday. Walking, talking, and out of nappies now! Thank you for the camaraderie, the sharing and teaching, the metta and karuna, the humour and patience, the expounding and clarifying, and the hair-tearing exasperation some of your posts have caused.:-) Cheers, Chris 18209 From: James Date: Thu Dec 26, 2002 0:23pm Subject: Re: Significant Event --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "christine_forsyth " wrote: > and the hair-tearing exasperation some of your posts have caused.:-) Hey!! I think I resemble that remark! ;-) Thank you Christine for your insightful posts, thorough research, and being such a sweet person. I also want to thank Sarah and Jon for accepting me to this group, overlooking my rebel-rousing tendencies, and keeping me on the straight-and-narrow. I appreciate all of the main posters to this group and the lurkers out there. I am appreciative for the positive feedback I have gotten about my posts. Though they may sometimes lack the deepest insight, I hope they always show the deepest heart. And finally, I want to express my appreciation to `that Nina person' for providing a role model of `Dhamma Dedication'. I hope everyone is learning as much as I am. Metta, James 18210 From: chase8383 Date: Thu Dec 26, 2002 5:53am Subject: Re: Mara No More Hi Howard You said in your post: "The word 'salvific' bothers you, I'm sure, due to your Christian background. The word, itself, carries no onus. My background is different, and the word raises no red flags with me. The word merely means having the power to save," My question is, is there anything to be saved? If we are at our core Buddha Nature, where is the salvation? If an airbag pops open in my car, preventing me from hitting the dash board during a crash, was there an act of salvation? Or was there just a cause and effect? Did anything really change? Be spacious, David 18211 From: Date: Thu Dec 26, 2002 10:46am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Dhamma Issues, Ch 2, Fruition-attainment, no 1 Hi, Swee Boon - In a message dated 12/26/02 1:21:28 PM Eastern Standard Time, nidive@y... writes: > > Then please enlighten me on the characteristics of nibbana. > I take it that anatta is not a characteristic of nibbana then, since > all alleged descriptions of the characteristic of nibbana are > not 'actual descriptions'. > ========================== Anatta is not a characteristic of anything. It is the absence of something. It is the absence of a core and of a controlling agent. With metta, Howard /Thus is how ye shall see all this fleeting world: A star at dawn, a bubble in a stream, a flash of lightning in a summer cloud, a flickering lamp, a phantom, and a dream./ (From the Diamond Sutra) 18212 From: peterdac4298 Date: Thu Dec 26, 2002 4:10pm Subject: Photo album Hi All Finally took the hint. Sorry about the quality, cheep home digi cam. Will nip out to the photo machine and get a less grainy analog version as soon as every thing is up and running after the bank holidays. Cheers Peter 18213 From: Date: Thu Dec 26, 2002 4:13pm Subject: Way 30, Synopsis "The Way of Mindflness" by Soma Thera, Section of the Synopsis p.41 http://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/bps/misc/wayof.html Consciousness and mental objects, too, should be contemplated upon by way of the diversity of the division of object (arammana], dominance [adhipati], conascence [sahajata], plane [bhumi], causal action [kamma], result [vipaka], non-causative functional process [kriya], and so forth [adi], beginning with impermanence [aniccadinam anupassananam vesena] and by way of the division of consciousness that is with passion and so forth come down in the portion of analytical exposition [niddesavare agatasaragadi bhedañca vasena]. [Tika] "Or the divisions of object... non-causative functional process and so forth." Contemplation should be done by way of the division of the blue and so forth pertaining to the variety of objects visual and so forth [rupadi arammana nanattassa niladi tabbhedassa); by way of the division of the "low" and so forth pertaining to the diverse kinds of dominance of the will-to-do and so forth [chandadi adhipati nanattassa hinadi tabbhedassa]; by way of the division of the spontaneous and non-spontaneous consciousness, absorption with initial application and so forth pertaining to the variety of conditions of conascence of knowledge, absorption and so forth [ñana jhanadi nanattassa sasankharikasankharika savitakkadi tabbhedassa]; by way of the division of lofty, middling, and so forth pertaining to the diverse planes, sensuous and so forth [kamavacaradi bhuminanattassa ukkattha majjhimadi tabbhedassa]; by way of the division of conduciveness to deva-plane-rebirth and so forth, pertaining to the diverse kind of moral action of skill and so forth [kusaladi kammananattassa devagati samvattaniyatadi tabbhedassa]; by way of the division of the state of requital which could be perceived in this very present condition of life and so forth, pertaining to the variety of dark and bright resultants of evil and good deeds (kanha sukka vipaka nanattassa dittha dhamma vedaniyatadi tabbhedassa]; by way of the division of the three good conditions of rebirth and so forth, pertaining to non-causative functional diversity of the sensuous plane and so forth [paritta bhumakadi kriya nanattassa tihetukadi tabbhedassa]. Mental objects should be contemplated upon by way of own characteristic [sallakkhana] [T: of impression and the like [phusanadi]]; by way of general characteristic [samañña lakkhana] [T: of impermanence and the like [aniccatadi]]; by way of phenomenon-emptiness [suññta dhamma], [T: namely, by way of the void-nature called soullessness [anattata sankhata suññata sabhavassa] to explain which clearly, the instruction of the portion dealing with the void in the Abhidhamma proceeded by means of the statement beginning with "At that time indeed there are phenomena, there are aggregates [yam vibhavetum abhidhamme tasmim kho pana samaye dhamma honti khandha hantiti adina suññatavara desana pavatta]], without any mention of a soul; by way of the seven contemplations of impermanence and so forth [aniccadi satta anupassananam]; and by way of the divisions of what is present and what is absent and so forth, in the analytical portion [niddesavare agata santasantadi bhedanañca vasena]. 18214 From: phamdluan2000 Date: Thu Dec 26, 2002 4:19pm Subject: Re: Anatta - View of some scholars Dear James, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "James " wrote: Hi Rhula, Nice collection of quotes. Good scholarship on your part. I will give my two cents worth about anatta since I have been studying it a bit also. These scholars are mistaken. They are assuming that the aggregates individually are not `the self', so perhaps the aggregates together could be considered `the self'. In other words, to use an example, they are saying that the Buddha, when talking about a house, said, "The door is not the house, the roof is not the house, the walls are not the house, the windows are not the house, etc." But the house does exist if you put them all together. So individually the aggregates are non-self, but maybe together they are self. This is not what the Buddha meant. Since each aggregate is non-self, even put together they should be non-self. BUUUTTTT….actually, the Buddha didn't want us to try to answer the question if we have a self or not. He just wanted us to view the aggregates as non-self and to not try to figure out if, when put together, they create a self. When he was asked this question directly, `Do we have a self', he refused to answer. He later explained to Ananda that to say we either do or don't have a self is wrong view and makes practice impossible. In other words, anatta cannot be figured out intellectually because its nature is beyond the scope of either existence or non-existence as we know them. Check out this article by Thanissaro Bhikkhu, "No Self or Not Self?" http://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/modern/thanissaro/notself2.html KKT: Allow me to pop in here. There are two main meanings of Self. (1) The metaphysical self and (2) The empirical self. The self the Buddha refused to answer to the question about its existence is the << metaphysical self >> ! This self in the historical context of the Buddha's time refers to the Atman of Brahmanism or the Jiva (life principle) of Jainism. It has the same meaning of << soul >> A metaphysical self is something substantial, independent, self-existent, eternal, changeless, and permanent. The reason the Buddha refused to answer, I think, is because such question is of the domain of pure speculation and useless for the purpose of liberation. But the self you refer to as << individually the aggregates are non-self, but maybe together they are self >> is the << empirical self >> ! This is the << feeling of I, Me, Mine, Myself >> This is this self that in countless suttas the Buddha denounced it as the source of our ignorance, the cause of our endless rebirths, and << the house-builder >> ! I think one must distinguish clearly those two selfs. Peace, KKT 18215 From: kenhowardau Date: Thu Dec 26, 2002 5:13pm Subject: [dsg] Re: Tinker, Tailor, Soldier, Sailor.......lawyer, used car salesman Hello Sarah, We still have a house-full of guests left over from Xmas and I'm barely finding time to read the daily bulletins. Thanks for that extra material on vitari, it seems to answer all my questions and more. I'll report back when I've read it a few more times. Kind regards Ken H --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Sarah wrote: > Dear Ken H & All, > > I have some more quotes which I hope are useful on the theme of the 3 > virati cetasikas 18216 From: azita gill Date: Thu Dec 26, 2002 6:07pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Significant Event --- "James " < > dear James, In the past I did not tear my hair out re some of your posts -- I just did not read them - press the delete button and you were gone! However, I have been reading some of your later posts and really like them - esp. the very sensitive and caring letters that you have written to the Star Kids. I have also benefited from them. I am enjoying Nina's posts on patience - Khanti - and thought that you have must have patience to answer the Star Kids' letters. Seems like we need LOTS of patience to develop right understanding of this present moment. I have been listening to tapes that were recorded while we were in Thailand and K.Sujin constantly reminds us to stay with this present moment and that clinging takes us away from this moment, again and again. I remind ple. to have patience, courage and good cheer, but I think I am only just beginning to see the real value in developing patience - the supreme purification of body, speech and mind. Thanks James, Cheers, Azita 18217 From: Date: Thu Dec 26, 2002 7:26pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Way 30, Synopsis Hi all, It looks to me like this section opens the contemplation of consciousness and dhammas to include all the fine details and many ways of classifying them of the abhidhamma. Does anyone know what text this line refers to and what it means: "the instruction of the portion dealing with the void in the Abhidhamma proceeded by means of the statement beginning with "At that time indeed there are phenomena, there are aggregates [yam vibhavetum abhidhamme tasmim kho pana samaye dhamma honti khandha hantiti adina suññatavara desana pavatta]], without any mention of a soul" thanks, Larry 18218 From: Date: Thu Dec 26, 2002 3:36pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Anatta - View of some scholars “It is impossible, it cannot happen that a person possessing right view could treat anything as self – there is no such possibility.â€? (The Buddha. . . Middle Length Discourses of the Buddha, pg.928, Bahudhatuka Sutta, The Many Kinds of Elements.) TG 18219 From: Date: Thu Dec 26, 2002 9:45pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Anatta - View of some scholars Hi TG & all, There is an interesting note to the passage you quote, "It is impossible, it cannot happen that a person possessing right view could treat anything as self -- there is no such possibility." Previously in this section of the sutta about the impossible and the possible the Buddha says a bhikkhu skilled in the impossible and the possible would say it is impossible that a person possessing right view could treat any *formation* as permanent or pleasurable. Here follows B. Bodhi's note: In the passage on self, sankhara, "formation," is replaced by dhamma, "thing." MA explains that this substitution is made to include concepts, such as kasina sign, etc., which the ordinary person is also prone to identify as self. However, in view of the fact that Nibbana is described as imperishable (accuta) and as bliss (sukha), and is also liable to be misconceived as self (see MN 1.26), the word "sankhara" may be taken to include only the conditioned, while "dhamma" includes both the conditioned and the unconditioned. This interpretation, however, is not endorsed by the commentaries of Acariya Buddhagosa. L: The note on MN 1.26 concerning how Nibbana is wrongly conceived as self is as follows: MA understands "Nibbana" here to refer to the five kinds of "supreme Nibbana here and now" included among the sixty-two wrong views of the Brahamajalla Sutta (DN 1.3.19-25/i.36-38), that is, Nibbana identified with the full enjoyment of sense pleasures or with the four jhanas. Enjoying this state, or yearning for it, he conceives it with craving. Priding himself on attaining it, he conceives it with conceit. Holding this imaginary Nibbana to be permanent, etc., he conceives it with views. L: I notice that in both notes, MA, the commentary to the Majjima Nikaya, avoids saying Nibbana is not self. Larry 18220 From: Date: Thu Dec 26, 2002 5:27pm Subject: Space element Hi Abhidhammattha Sangaha Ch VIII, section 4, on pannattis: vii) concept of space (akasa), such as a well or a cave. It is derived from space which is not contacted by the four Great Elements. From the Bahudhatuka Sutta M.> There are Ananda these 6 elements:The earth,water,fire,air,space and consciousness element. Could someone please explain what this space element is, is it a Paramattha Dhamma or Pannatti/the concept of space as above ? Thanks Steve. 18221 From: Sarah Date: Thu Dec 26, 2002 10:35pm Subject: Re: [dsg] New Member Hi Ted (Tep), Beth, Dot and Ram, I'm also very glad to see you all here and appreciate the introductions you've kindly shared. Please be patient with old threads and just ignore those which are too confusing or feel free to ask for any clarifications. Best of all, just start your own - we always welcome new topics. Some particular topics in Useful Posts such as "New to the List', "New to Abhidhamma' and "Pali' may be helpful: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/files/Useful_Posts Also the simple Pali glossary if you're not familiar with many of the terms (I'm sure Ram is): http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/files/Glossary_of_pali_terms Also the search function on the back-up archives can be helpful: http://www.escribe.com/religion/dhammastudygroup/ ********** Beth, I'm also appreciating the helpful Dhp verses and your honest and sincere comments. Where do you live? Ram, as Chris said, there are a few others from Sri Lanka here and some of us have also spent quite a lot of time in your beautiful country. Actually, Jon and I met there and we also joined Chris and the others on the trip in June. Dot, I'm sure you'll feel very at home with the other Queenslanders here - quite a vocal mob on your doorstep and a treat to meet......(dreaming of Noosa....;-)) Ted, as Kom said, there are several Thais and American Thais around here...sometimes they even break out into Thai-Pali, so that should make life easier for you;-) I'm impressed that your friend's search found us and look f/w to hearing more about your ideas on vipassana and meditation. (Hope we hear again from Chuck, also from Texas and last spotted in Bangkok too..) Ram, I also share your appreciation for the Tipitaka and think we're really fortunate to have access to it and be able to study, share and discuss together. Look forward to reading any further comments, questions or answers that any of you care to contribute. Sarah ======== --- "Tep Sastri " wrote: > Hello everyone! > > I just recently joined DhammastudyGroup and would like to introduce > myself a little bit. 18222 From: Sarah Date: Thu Dec 26, 2002 11:02pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Significant Event Hi Christine, James & All, --- "christine_forsyth " wrote: > Hi Sarah and Jon, and fellow dsg-ers, > > Just wanted to draw your attention to a significant event happening > on 28 December. Dhamma Study Group will have its third birthday. > Walking, talking, and out of nappies now! ..... I'm not very good on baby stages - does that mean we're past the 'teething' one??? Thanks a lot for drawing our attention to this milestone event. Perhaps we'll have a little celebration.... ..... > Thank you for the camaraderie, the sharing and teaching, the metta > and karuna, the humour and patience, the expounding and clarifying, > and the hair-tearing exasperation some of your posts have caused.:-) ..... ;-) As you always remind us,'good friends' make the holy life and any group or list is only as good as the participants.....Many thanks to all for all the support and wonderful contributions -- including those that need a few prods on the 'straight and narrow';-)I've really benefited and learnt a lot from the good reminders, the references, the keen questioning and challenging, the debates, the friendships, the worldly conditions and more. For any (many) shortcomings in style or content on list or behind the scenes on our part, apologies and we'll try to improve.... As for the 'hair-tearing exasperation', just be glad it doesn't all show on screen yet;-) Thanks again for the kind words, Sarah ======= 18223 From: rahula_80 Date: Thu Dec 26, 2002 11:41pm Subject: Origins of Buddhism Hi, Can anyone recommend books on the origins of Buddhism or early Buddhism other than Gombrich's "How Buddhism Began" Also, I would appreciate comments on the following books. 1. Studies in the Origins of Buddhism by Govind Chandra Pande 2. Early Buddhism and its Origins by Vishwanath Prasad Varma 3. Buddhist and Vedic Studies Oliver Hector de Alwis Wijesekara 4. Early Buddhism by T.W. Rhys Davids 5. Sakya or Buddhist Origins by Caroline A.F. Rhys Davids 6. The Vedantic Buddhism of Buddha by J.G. Jennings 7. Hinduism and Buddhism Ananda Kettish Coomaraswamy Rahula 18224 From: Sarah Date: Thu Dec 26, 2002 11:48pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Photo album Peter, --- "peterdac4298 " wrote: > Hi All > > Finally took the hint. Sorry about the quality, cheep home digi > cam. Will nip out to the photo machine and get a less grainy analog > version as soon as every thing is up and running after the bank > holidays. ..... Good to see you in the 'Hall of Fame. The quality of yr neighbours' pic (Joanne and Janice)is just as poor....they may be begging for an upgrade too;-)No one minds and at least you managed to avoid the stray arm phantom that slipped into Larry's;-)Perhaps James can remove the grain without leaving home..... So to any other newbies or oldies, pls don't let grainy analog, stray arms or pouting expressions deter you from joining us (left side of home page under photos): http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup And now, Peter, you can relax and help Chris & James drop hints to others;-) Sarah (retiring and handing over her album team place to James with his P.R. and scanning skills - ) ======= 18225 From: Sarah Date: Fri Dec 27, 2002 0:57am Subject: Re: [dsg] Patience, o patience Hi Nina,(James and Christine) Thankyou for the extra reminders. --- nina van gorkom wrote: > But when we are sad because of what somone else said to us, it seems that we are at such moments not openminded to these reminders, even though we read them or type them out. Lack of satipatthana, the conditions are >not right. ..... Just as you say: we can write about patience, but when there aren’t the right conditions it doesn’t arise. We can also see at such times how much clinging there is to self - finding oneself important, raising the banner without any metta or consideration for the other or detachment from the sounds and visible objects being experienced at those times. ..... > But later on, conditions change again. > Thank you, with appreciation, Nina. > P.S. I also appreciate very much Beth's quote, because it is "my own" > akusala when I am dismayed or sad, I better be aware of the citta at > that > moment: > > Let none find fault with others; > let none see the omissions and commissions of others. > But let one see one's own acts, done and undone. > Dhammapada 4:50 .... As you say, while we are concerned with the others’ deeds, we forget about ‘our’ akusala cittas (unwholesome consciusness) at such times. James asked some time back about ‘whether generating metta toward oneself be the same as generating metta toward another’ as there’s no self. He also asked about being selfish. I think that whenever we find ourselves important or are concerned about our own thoughts, feelings or consciousness, the selfishness and attachment to self is evident. At these times we are so swayed and influenced by the 8 worldly conditions. When there is metta and kindness to others, on the otherhand, there is no concern for praise, gain and so on. There isn’t any expectation or anxiety about others’ responses to us. It’s not a matter of ‘working’ on metta, so much as understanding the difference between when there are moments of kindness, friendliness and consideration (without attachment or aversion) and when there aren’t. Howard gave some helpful reminders on patience, forgiveness and metta in post 17378. He wrote: “Also, I think the perfection of khanti (patience/forbearance) is close in meaning and effect to forgiveness.” There can be just a little more giving up of the clinging to self every day....dana, forgiveness and patience never hurt...slowly, slowly. Because, in reality there is no self, doesn’t mean that with more understanding ‘one’ doesn’t think of oneself and others. There can be thinking with right view, wrong view,ignorance or any other state. Metta remains a wholesome quality and selfishness an unwholesome one. I liked the reminders James quoted for the benefits of developed metta: “One sleeps easily, wakes easily, dreams no evil dreams. One is dear to human beings, dear to non-human beings. The devas protect one. Neither fire, poison, nor weapons can touch one. One’s mind gains concentration quickly. One’s complexion is bright. One dies unconfused and --if penetrating no higher -- is headed for the Brahma worlds”. I think like James wrote to one of the Star Kids, we can begin to see the heaven and hell we create for ourselves all the time and can begin to know the difference between the light and ‘pure’ states and compared to the heavy and ‘impure’ ones. ..... Christine was also discussing more about the characteristic of metta. In her book ‘Metta’(transl by Nina), Khun Sujin says: “No matter whether we meet people in a room, or outside, on the street or in the bus, do we consider everybody we meet as a friend? If that is not so we should not recite the words about extending metta to all beings, that will not be of any use. If we see someone now, at this moment, and we feel misgivings about him, we should not try to extend metta to all beings. Only those who have attained jhana are able to do this. When the meditation subject of metta brahma-vihara has been developed metta can become boundless. However, we should begin with simply applying sincere metta in daily life.” Later, she also says: “Metta conditions generosity in giving and it conditions kind, agreeable speech. It makes one abstain from rude, disgracious conduct,from doing wrong to others. We can help people with kindness and we can consider them as fellow-beings who are friends. We can learn not to think of them with conceit,as strangers who are different. We will learn not to think of them in terms of “he” and “me”, or to consider them as superior or as inferior in comparison with ourselves, because that is conceit. When we investigate the characteristic of our citta we will know from our own experience that kusala citta is completely different from akusala citta. The Dhammasangani (the 1st book of the Abhidhamma, 1340) refers to wholesome qualities such as plasticity, gentlenes, smoothness, pliancy, and humbleness of heart. The commentary to this passage (Atthasalini11,Bk111,395)describes humbleness of heart as follows: “by the absence of conceit this person’s heart is humble; the state of such a person is humbleness of heart.” Softness, gentleness, pliancy and humbleness of heart, these qualities are characteristics of metta.” ******* Sarah ====== 18226 From: Sarah Date: Fri Dec 27, 2002 1:41am Subject: Re: [dsg] Anatta - View of some scholars Hi Rahula, --- "rahula_80 " > 1. TW Rhys Davids went "mad" while working on the PTS Pali English > Dictionary which Stede had to finish for him because of his "mental > breakdown". ..... I have no idea whether this or the other comments you gave are correct or not. What I would say, though, is that I think we are all really indebted to the devotion and dedication of these early translators and compilers and founders of the PTS. For many of us, the PTS translations and dictionaries were for many decades the only ones available. These were our only access to the written dhamma. Miss Horner (a very kind and helpful lady imho), in her introduction to the translation of the Vinaya series, reminds us how when Rhys Davids and Oldenberg wrote their partial translation, the PTS had not been founded, the other Pali translations had not been published and nor had this dictionary. In his introduction to the dictionary,written in 1921, TW Rhys Davids acknowledges the immense support of Stede: “Anybody familiar with this sort of work will know what care and patience, what scholarly knowledge and judgment are involved in the collection of such material, in the sorting, the sifting and final arrangement of it, in the adding of cross references, in the consideration of etymological puzzles, in the comparison and correcion of various or faulty readings, and in the verification of references given by others, or found in the indexes. For all this work the users of the Dictionary will have to thank my colleague, Dr William Stede. It may be interesting to notice here that the total number of refernces to appear in this first edition of the new dictionary is estimated to be between one hundered and fifty and one hundred and sixty thousand. The Bavarian Academy has awarded to Dr Stede a personal grant of 3100 marks for his work on this Dictionary.” ***** These works were done by those living on very limited funds, no computers or even electric typewriters, very limited communication with other research expertise and so on. Rahula, with your other question about texts on early Buddhism, I can only refer you to the ancient texts themselves and their commentaries, which you would have no difficulty following. These would include: - Book of the Discipline (Vinaya) and Bahiranidana (introduction to the commentary)- all PTS - Mahavamsa -Ancient chronicles of Sri Lanka PTS - Atthasalini (Expositor) comm. to Dhammasangani, PTS ***** I also like Malalaskera’s “Pali Literature of Ceylon” a helpful history and Nina has “The Life and Work of Buddhaghosa” by Law. I’m not sure where you can get these - actually I want to get the one on Buddhaghosa if anyone sees it and can help. ***** Nina, Rob K or others may give further suggestions. I usually just read the texts themselves or books that stay very close to the texts. Sarah ======= 18227 From: Seylan Bank - DBD (Sumane Rathnasuriya) Date: Fri Dec 27, 2002 1:55am Subject: RE: [dsg] Significant Event Dear Sarah, Jon, Christine & the Group, Congrats & thanks for opportunities offered! It is Great to be in the shade of those with prag~na; Yet struggling to find direction, Sumane 18228 From: christine_forsyth Date: Fri Dec 27, 2002 2:03am Subject: Re: Anatta - View of some scholars Hi Rahula, James, KKT, TG, Larry, and All, A few quotes on self and Self - (Buddha-nature, Dharma-body, rigpa and Nibbana get a mention as well). Bhikkhu Bodhi: "The Mulapariyaya Sutta, the first entry of the Majjhima Nikaya, ... sets itself the aim of exposing the whole mass of subjective misconceptions from their branches down to their roots. ... As both its title and position imply, the Mulapariyaya Sutta is the most fundamental of the Buddha's discourses found in the Pali Canon. It is the concentrated essence of the teaching, packing into its enigmatic statements profound truths of ontological, epistemological, and psychological significance." (The Discourse on the Root of Existence - the Mulapariyaya Sutta and its Commentaries) Thanissaro Bhikkhu says in his Translators Note to the Mulapariyaya sutta: "there has long been -- and still is -- a common tendency to create a "Buddhist" metaphysics in which the experience of emptiness, the Unconditioned, the Dharma-body, Buddha-nature, rigpa, etc., is said to function as the ground of being from which the "All" -- the entirety of our sensory & mental experience -- is said to spring and to which we return when we meditate. Some people think that these theories are the inventions of scholars without any direct meditative experience, but actually they have most often originated among meditators, who label (or in the words of the discourse, "perceive") a particular meditative experience as the ultimate goal, identify with it in a subtle way (as when we are told that "we are the knowing"), and then view that level of experience as the ground of being out of which all other experience comes. " The MN 1 Mulapariyaya Sutta 'The Root Sequence'ends with the unusual sentence - "That is what the Blessed One said. Displeased, the monks did not delight in the Blessed One's words." "Any teaching that follows these lines would be subject to the same criticism that the Buddha directed against the monks who first heard this discourse." http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/majjhima/mn001.html ----------------------------------------------- A quote from "No Inner Core - Anatta" by U Silananda "They claim that Buddha was only directing us not to see the real Self in the personal ego - a view identical to the Hindu view. They reason that Buddha's denial of certain things being atta indicates that He affirmed a true atta of a different nature. When Buddha said, "This is not atta," these scholars insert the following argument: "But a moment's consideration of the logic of the words will show that they assume the reality of a Self that is not any one or all of the `things' that are denied of it." But let us say, for the sake of argument, that I have five animal horns here. If I say "None of these horns is the horn of a rabbit," does it mean that there exists somewhere else or in another form such a thing as a horn of a rabbit? No. A horn of a rabbit is just a designation, an abstraction, without any corresponding reality. Similarly Buddha often said, "This is not atta. That is not atta. Nothing here is atta." Does that indicate that Buddha means that there exists somewhere something that can be called atta? No. I will conclude this section by explaining a very important statement found in Patisambhidamagga and in Majjhima Nikaya: "Sabbe sankhara anicca; sabbe sankhara dukkha (not in M.N.); sabbe dhamma anatta." The first sentence means, "AII conditioned things are impermanent." The second means, `All conditioned things are suffering." The third sentence, however is different. Here, Buddha does not use the word sankhara, but He uses dhamma instead. Dhamma here means all things without exception. So the third sentence means, `AII things, conditioned or unconditioned, are anatta, are void of self and soul." This means that even Nibbana, which is asankhara, unconditioned, is not atta or is void of atta. This statement unequivocally denies atta of any kind, even in ultimate Truth and Enlightenment, even in Nibbana. " http://www.buddha.per.sg/dharma01/anatta6.htm metta, Christine --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "rahula_80 " wrote: > Hi, > > Many scholars (eg. Pande, Nakamura etc.) have claim > that the Buddha never denied the existence of Self except that the 5 > aggregates is NOT Self or should be identified as Self. > > Are they in error? 18229 From: christine_forsyth Date: Fri Dec 27, 2002 2:07am Subject: Re: Photo album Hi Peter, Great to see who I'm talking to at last! Victor, Paul and James are in the rows behind and the four of you should be able to keep all those kids there under control, if not - see Mrs. Abbott :-) metta, Christine --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "peterdac4298 " wrote: > Hi All > > Finally took the hint. Sorry about the quality, cheep home digi > cam. Will nip out to the photo machine and get a less grainy analog > version as soon as every thing is up and running after the bank > holidays. > > Cheers > Peter 18230 From: Beth Date: Fri Dec 27, 2002 3:35am Subject: Re: [dsg] New Member *********snipped***************** Sarah wrote: Beth, I'm also appreciating the helpful Dhp verses and your honest and sincere comments. Where do you live? Hello all, Hello Sarah, Thank you for the warm welcome :-) I'm thankful for this list already, even though some of the subject matter is a tad heady for me at the moment. I realize when one begins something there's usually a learning curve :-) I will take advantage of the resources on this list. I live in Pennsylvania USA, very close to Philadelphia. I have as of yet to go to any of the Buddhist centers in the city as of yet. ~peace, Beth 18231 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Fri Dec 27, 2002 3:36am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Dhamma Issues, Ch 2, Fruition-attainment, no 1 Howard --- upasaka@a... wrote: > Hi, Jon - ... << I do think, however, that the following is somewhat overstated: "Once the highest level of jhana has been attained, there is no further development possible on that 'track'. Nor is there any crossover from jhana to insight." There is cross-over, but more is required to achieve it - it is not an automatic development from the jhanas. Using the jhanas as a foundation for vipassana bhavana, as a basis, stepping-off point, support, and cross-over point is the most classical approach, expressed again and again, most especially in the Majhima Nikaya.>> What the texts talk about, to my recollection, is enlightenment with jhana as base, not jhana as a basis for insight. The difference is significant. When jhana forms the base for enlightenment, it does so by being the object of the moments of insight that lead to enlightenment. This of course cannot occur unless insight has already been developed to the point that enlightenment is imminent. To my knowledge, jhana is not given as a basis for the development of insight in the sense of facilitating, or being a stepping-off point, for that development. Liberation that is attained 'both ways' is a higher attainment that liberation by insight only. To my understanding, the persons who attain in this manner are relatively few, so I would not see it as the classic approach. I would be interested to know what suttas you have in mind here. <> Enlightenment however attained can only be the outcome of the proper investigation of reality (i.e., insight), and enlightenment both ways occurs in certain cases where jhana has been developed as well as that insight (but not by any means in all such cases). To my understanding, it is not a case of 'jhana first, then the investigation of reality'. There is reality at every present moment for all of us, and there is therefore the potential for some level of awareness of reality, if the appropriate conditions have been developed. Jon 18232 From: Date: Thu Dec 26, 2002 11:09pm Subject: Re: [dsg] New Member Hi, Beth - In a message dated 12/27/02 6:33:42 AM Eastern Standard Time, An_Morrigna@B... writes: > Hello all, Hello Sarah, > Thank you for the warm welcome :-) > I'm thankful for this list already, even though some of the > subject matter is a tad heady for me at the moment. I realize when one > begins something there's usually a learning curve :-) I will take advantage > of the resources on this list. > I live in Pennsylvania USA, very close to Philadelphia. I have > as of yet to go to any of the Buddhist centers in the city as of yet. > > ~peace, > Beth > > ========================= Welcome to the list from another member and an ex-Philadelphian! I was born in Philly *many* years ago, West Philly to be exact, and I remained there until my early 30's. My wife and lived there while I was going for my Ph.D. at the U. of P and teaching math at Temple University. We lived near City Line Avenue near the park at that time. Are there any Theravadin groups, centers, wats, or other Theravadin organizations in the area now? All I ever seem to see on lists are non-Theravadin, Buddhist organizations in the Philly area. With metta, Howard /Thus is how ye shall see all this fleeting world: A star at dawn, a bubble in a stream, a flash of lightning in a summer cloud, a flickering lamp, a phantom, and a dream./ (From the Diamond Sutra) 18233 From: Date: Thu Dec 26, 2002 11:31pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Dhamma Issues, Ch 2, Fruition-attainment, no 1 Hi, Jon - In a message dated 12/27/02 6:37:53 AM Eastern Standard Time, jonoabb@y... writes: > > Howard > > --- upasaka@a... wrote: >Hi, Jon - > ... > << I do think, however, that the following is somewhat > overstated: "Once the highest level of jhana has been attained, there > is no further development possible on that 'track'. Nor is there any > crossover from jhana to insight." > There is cross-over, but more is required to achieve it - it is not > an automatic development from the jhanas. Using the jhanas as a > foundation for vipassana bhavana, as a basis, stepping-off point, > support, and cross-over point is the most classical approach, > expressed again and again, most especially in the Majhima Nikaya.>> > > What the texts talk about, to my recollection, is enlightenment with > jhana as base, not jhana as a basis for insight. The difference is > significant. > > When jhana forms the base for enlightenment, it does so by being the > object of the moments of insight that lead to enlightenment. This of > course cannot occur unless insight has already been developed to the > point that enlightenment is imminent. To my knowledge, jhana is not > given as a basis for the development of insight in the sense of > facilitating, or being a stepping-off point, for that development. ----------------------------------------------------- Howard: I understand your point. However, attaining the jhanas includes the the arousing of a number of enlightenment factors, which puts one already a step up on the way. By attaining jhanas, and then embarking on vipassana bhavana, one is starting the climb having already ascended some steps. Then, classically, as in the Anupada Sutta, and as you point out, the jhanas, their features, and especially the entering and leaving of jhanas, can serve as objects of investigation. -------------------------------------------------------- > > Liberation that is attained 'both ways' is a higher attainment that > liberation by insight only. > ---------------------------------------------------------- Howard: Liberation attained both ways, as I understand it, must involve the formless absorptions. That, however, is not the standard, classic formula, which involves achieving enlightenment from the base of the 4th jhana. ---------------------------------------------------------- To my understanding, the persons who> > attain in this manner are relatively few, so I would not see it as > the classic approach. ---------------------------------------------------------- Howard: With regard to the role of the formless absorptions, I agree. But the formula involving the 4th jhana is, by far, the most repeated one, especially in the Majhima Nikaya. ---------------------------------------------------------- I would be interested to know what suttas you> > have in mind here. > ---------------------------------------------------------- Howard: Loads of suttas in the M. Nikaya. They involve entering the 4th jhana, and then turning the mind to a variety of dhammas, to past lives, to the births and deaths of beings, and finally to the destruction of the taints. ------------------------------------------------------------ > < - specifically no investigation of reality, no intensified > application of mindfulness and clear comprehension to arising and > ceasing conditions, then no liberation follows; that is not even > remotely in dispute by me.>> > > Enlightenment however attained can only be the outcome of the proper > investigation of reality (i.e., insight), and enlightenment both ways > occurs in certain cases where jhana has been developed as well as > that insight (but not by any means in all such cases). > --------------------------------------------------- Howard: I'm not making a universal claim here, Jon. -------------------------------------------------- > > To my understanding, it is not a case of 'jhana first, then the > investigation of reality'. There is reality at every present moment > for all of us, and there is therefore the potential for some level of > awareness of reality, if the appropriate conditions have been > developed. > --------------------------------------------------- Howard: Jhana-first is *one* way, the most standard one, but far from the only one. There is insight-first, there is tandem development, etc. --------------------------------------------------- > > Jon > > ========================= With metta, Howard /Thus is how ye shall see all this fleeting world: A star at dawn, a bubble in a stream, a flash of lightning in a summer cloud, a flickering lamp, a phantom, and a dream./ (From the Diamond Sutra) 18234 From: nidive Date: Fri Dec 27, 2002 8:14am Subject: [dsg] Re: Dhamma Issues, Ch 2, Fruition-attainment, no 1 Dear James, > Nibbana is indefinable because nibbana is release from all of > the clung-to aggregates and any definitions come from mental > formations (thoughts), which is one of the aggregates, so any > definition from the mind cannot describe something that is > foreign to the mind. I don't agree that nibbana is undefinable. If it were undefinable, I am sure the Buddha would have said that it is undefinable. But he didn't. Instead he gave us various descriptions of it through various suttas from the Tipitaka. And he never mentioned that nibbana is undefinable (not any sutta I know of). I am pretty sure the idea of nibbana as undefinable originates from the Mahayana school of teaching. I don't agree that nibbana is foreign to the mind of an ariyan. Nibbana is known by any ariyan. How is nibbana known? It is by means of the impermanent mind that nibbana is known. And it was through that that the Buddha was able to give us a description of nibbana. If nibbana was not known by the impermanent mind of the Buddha, we are all discussing about nibbana in vain. Supposing there is a kind of animal that no man had ever seen. How are we going to 'define' such an unknown animal? Something which is not known by the mind cannot be 'defined'. Similarly, a non-ariyan cannot 'define' nibbana simply because his mind does not know nibbana. But an ariyan can 'define' nibbana simply because his mind does know nibbana. > Definable charactersitics come from thoughts, but nibbana is > non-thought; so it cannot be defined or described. But I am sure that the following sutta quote comes from the thoughts of the Buddha: "This is peace, this is exquisite -- the resolution of all fabrications, the relinquishment of all acquisitions, the ending of craving; dispassion; cessation; Nibbana." -- AN III.32 I am sure that the Buddha does know nibbana. I am sure that the Buddha is Fully Self-Enlightened. I am sure that if nibbana is undefinable, the Buddha would have said so. It is too important a subject for him to keep silent. Regards, NEO Swee Boon 18235 From: nidive Date: Fri Dec 27, 2002 8:30am Subject: [dsg] Re: Dhamma Issues, Ch 2, Fruition-attainment, no 1 Hi Howard, > Anatta is not a characteristic of anything. It is the absence of > something. It is the absence of a core and of a controlling agent. What exactly do you mean by 'characteristic'? For I perceive the 'absence of a core and of a controlling agent' as a characteristic in itself. It is a negative characteristic as opposed to a positive characteristic, ie. 'presence of a core and of a controlling agent'. For example, "This person has long hair". Long hair is a characteristic of this person. It is a positive characteristic. "That person has no long hair". No long hair is a characteristic of that person. It is a negative characteristic. NEO Swee Boon 18236 From: James Date: Fri Dec 27, 2002 8:33am Subject: Re: [dsg] Photo album Sarah, I tried to remove the grain in Peter's picture. I was successful to some extent. I think it looks much better and gives a good idea of Peter's visage (I can just hear him saying `Cheers!') As requested, I also removed your gray hair. Additionally, I took the opportunity to give you a more forceful appearance. I don't think anyone will mess with you after they see this photo!! ;-) I also, for the holiday season, fixed up a picture of Howard. It captures his Jolly Spirit!! The pics can be viewed at this link: http://www.geocities.com/buddhatrue/dsg.htm Metta, James Ps. I have my niece visiting (7 years old) from out of town and she is very high maintenance…and views her uncle as a private entertainer! I will respond to the other posts written to me later when I have time. 18237 From: Date: Fri Dec 27, 2002 3:39am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Dhamma Issues, Ch 2, Fruition-attainment, no 1 Hi, Swee Boon - I agree that defining what is meant by 'characteristic' is not easy. Generally I am suspicious of so-called "negative characteristics". There are too many of them. With metta, Howard In a message dated 12/27/02 11:31:29 AM Eastern Standard Time, nidive@y... writes: > > Hi Howard, > > >Anatta is not a characteristic of anything. It is the absence of > >something. It is the absence of a core and of a controlling agent. > > What exactly do you mean by 'characteristic'? > > For I perceive the 'absence of a core and of a controlling agent' as > a characteristic in itself. It is a negative characteristic as > opposed to a positive characteristic, ie. 'presence of a core and of > a controlling agent'. > > For example, > > "This person has long hair". Long hair is a characteristic of this > person. It is a positive characteristic. > > "That person has no long hair". No long hair is a characteristic of > that person. It is a negative characteristic. > > > NEO Swee Boon > > /Thus is how ye shall see all this fleeting world: A star at dawn, a bubble in a stream, a flash of lightning in a summer cloud, a flickering lamp, a phantom, and a dream./ (From the Diamond Sutra) 18238 From: nidive Date: Fri Dec 27, 2002 8:43am Subject: [dsg] Re: Dhamma Issues, Ch 2, Fruition-attainment, no 1 Hi Howard, > I agree that defining what is meant by 'characteristic' is not > easy. Generally I am suspicious of so-called "negative > characteristics". There are too many of them. There are just as many 'positive characteristics' as there are 'negative characteristics'. I think it is pretty pointless to go on discussing about this subject until there is a clear definition of what is meant by 'characteristic'. Regards, NEO Swee Boon 18239 From: Date: Fri Dec 27, 2002 4:52am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Dhamma Issues, Ch 2, Fruition-attainment, no 1 Hi, Swee Boon - In a message dated 12/27/02 11:44:29 AM Eastern Standard Time, nidive@y... writes: > > Hi Howard, > > >I agree that defining what is meant by 'characteristic' is not > >easy. Generally I am suspicious of so-called "negative > >characteristics". There are too many of them. > > There are just as many 'positive characteristics' as there > are 'negative characteristics'. > ------------------------------------------------ Howard: Is any polygon simultaneously a triangle and a square? No. Is there such a characteristic, then, if nothing has it or can have it? I think not. But every polygon lacks being simultaneously triangular and square. Does that mean that there *is* the characteristic of not being simultaneously triangular and square? This is one problem I have with "negative characteristics". Any property concept we can dream up which applies to nothing at all yields a universal negative characteristic. To me, in general, to say that something is missing is not to ascribe a characteristic, but to deny one. I do not see a balance in this matter. But perhaps this is just a matter of taste. Whatever we may or may not work out on this, there is still dukkha and the need to remove it. So perhaps we should turn our efforts more towards that and a bit away from questions of how many characterictics can dance on the head of a pin! ;-)) ------------------------------------------------------ > > I think it is pretty pointless to go on discussing about this > subject until there is a clear definition of what is meant > by 'characteristic'. > -------------------------------------------------------- Howard: I agree. --------------------------------------------------------- > > Regards, > NEO Swee Boon > > ============================ With metta, Howard /Thus is how ye shall see all this fleeting world: A star at dawn, a bubble in a stream, a flash of lightning in a summer cloud, a flickering lamp, a phantom, and a dream./ (From the Diamond Sutra) 18240 From: nina van gorkom Date: Fri Dec 27, 2002 10:03am Subject: Perfections, Ch 7, Patience, no. 7 Perfections, Ch 7, Patience, no. 7 We read in the Commentary to the ³Basket of Conduct² (Miscellaneous Sayings)² Again, only the man of wisdom can patiently tolerate the wrongs of others, not the dull-witted man. In the man lacking wisdom, the wrongs of others only provoke impatience; but for the wise, they call his patience into play and make it grow even stronger. How shall we live from now on? If we have right understanding, we can patiently tolerate the wrongs of someone else, but if we lack understanding, impatience will increase. We read further on: Only the man of wisdom is skilful in providing for the welfare of all beings, without discriminating between dear people, neutrals, and enemies. All the teachings are beneficial. We can see that the Buddha helped his followers in explaining the Dhamma and exhorting them time and again to consider the benefit of kusala dhammas. For example, when he said, ³Only the man of wisdom is skilful in providing for the welfare of all beings, without discriminating between dear people, neutrals, and enemies.² We should not be on the side of our own group of friends, we should be impartial and skilful in providing for the welfare of all beings. When someone is really skilful, he has patience so that he is intent on what is beneficial. When he is impatient he will not acquire any benefit and this is to the disadvantage of himself. We read in the Commentary to the ³Basket of Conduct², no. 1, the Conduct of Akitti: Síla has been called ³tapa², ascetism or austerity, because it burns (3 the impurity arising from akusala. Because of the splendour and power of the perfection of patience and the perfection of viriya, also these perfections have been called tapa, ascetism: they burn the impurity of craving and laziness. The Bodhisatta developed those perfections to the highest degree when he was in this life. It should be said that he developed them by the power of the perfection of patience (khanti påramittånubhåvena), because the restraint by patience leads to what is supreme. The Exalted One said: ³patience is the highest ascetism² (khanti paramam tapo). The first words of the ³Exhortation to the Påtimokkha² are, ³Patience is the hishest ascetism². If patience and endurance are lacking, the perfections cannot lead to the realization of the four noble Truths. We should think of the patience of people at the time when the Buddha had not yet finally passed away. When we read the suttas and reflect on them in detail we can see the patience and endurance of people at that time who applied the Dhamma in their conduct and practice. footnote: 3. Tappati is the passive form of tapati. Tappati means to burn, to shine. 18241 From: nidive Date: Fri Dec 27, 2002 10:11am Subject: [dsg] Re: Dhamma Issues, Ch 2, Fruition-attainment, no 1 Hi Howard, > Does that mean that there *is* the characteristic of not being > simultaneously triangular and square? To me, there indeed is the characteristic of not being simultaneously triangular and square. > This is one problem I have with "negative characteristics". Any > property concept we can dream up which applies to nothing at all > yields a universal negative characteristic. To me, any negative characteristic will always yield a corresponding positive characteristic just as any positive characteristic will always yield a corresponding negative characteristic. I liken it to the nature of conditioned dhammas. Where there is this, there is that. Where there is not this, there is not that. > Whatever we may or may not work out on this, there is still dukkha > and the need to remove it. So perhaps we should turn our efforts > more towards that and a bit away from questions of how many > characterictics can dance on the head of a pin! ;-)) Agree. Regards, NEO Swee Boon 18242 From: christine_forsyth Date: Fri Dec 27, 2002 2:41pm Subject: Re: Space element Hi Steve, Nyanatiloka's definition is: "ákása: 'space', is, according to Com., of two kinds: 1. limited space (paricchinnákása or paricchedákása), 2. endless space (anantákása), i.e. cosmic space. 1. Limited space, under the name of ákása-dhátu (space element), belongs to derived corporeality (s. khandha, Summary I; Dhs 638) and to a sixfold classification of elements (s. dhátu; M 112, 115, 140). It is also an object of kasina (q.v.) meditation. It is defined as follows: "The space element has the characteristic of delimiting matter. Its function is to indicate the boundaries of matter. It is manifested as the confines of matter; or its manifestation consists in being untouched (by the 4 great elements), and in holes and apertures. Its proximate cause is the matter delimited. It is on account of the space element that one can say of material things delimited that 'this is above. below, around that' " (Vis.M. XIV, 63). 2. Endless space is called in Atthasálini ajatákása, 'unentangled', i.e. unobstructed or empty space. It is the object of the first immaterial absorption (s. jhána), the sphere of boundless space (ákásánañcáyatana). According to Abhidhamma philosophy, endless space has no objective reality (being purely conceptual), which is indicated by the fact that it is not included in the triad of the wholesome (kusalatika), which comprises the entire reality. Later Buddhist schools have regarded it as one of several unconditioned or uncreated states (asankhata dharma) - a view that is rejected in Kath. (s. Guide. p. 70). Theraváda Buddhism recognizes only Nibbána as an unconditioned element (asankhata-dhátu: s. Dhs. 1084)." http://www.budsas.org/ebud/bud-dict/dic_idx.htm metta, Christine --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Bodhi2500@a... wrote: > Hi > > Abhidhammattha Sangaha Ch VIII, section 4, on pannattis: > vii) concept of space (akasa), such as a well or a cave. It is > derived from space which is not contacted by the four Great Elements. > > From the Bahudhatuka Sutta M.> > > There are Ananda these 6 elements:The earth,water,fire,air,space and > consciousness element. > > > Could someone please explain what this space element is, is it a Paramattha > Dhamma or Pannatti/the concept of space as above ? > > Thanks > Steve. 18243 From: Beth Date: Fri Dec 27, 2002 0:25pm Subject: Re: [dsg] New Member From: Hi, Beth - ========================= Welcome to the list from another member and an ex-Philadelphian! I was born in Philly *many* years ago, West Philly to be exact, and I remained there until my early 30's. My wife and lived there while I was going for my Ph.D. at the U. of P and teaching math at Temple University. We lived near City Line Avenue near the park at that time. Are there any Theravadin groups, centers, wats, or other Theravadin organizations in the area now? All I ever seem to see on lists are non-Theravadin, Buddhist organizations in the Philly area. With metta, Howard ************************************** Hello all, Hello Howard, Thank you Howard for sharing some of your background with me :-) I've lived in rural Pa. most of my life and moved here to Blue Bell about five years ago. I've checked the web, only centers I've seen thus far aren't specifically Theravedan. ~peace, Beth 18244 From: Date: Fri Dec 27, 2002 0:12pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Anatta - View of some scholars In a message dated 12/26/2002 9:46:41 PM Pacific Standard Time, LBIDD@w... writes: << L: I notice that in both notes, MA, the commentary to the Majjima Nikaya, avoids saying Nibbana is not self. Larry >> I disagree with your take on these quotes Larry. I believe in the first case, it in fact does directly say that Nibbana is not self as follows: -- Quote: -- "dhamma" includes both the conditioned and the unconditioned. The point of saying that "all dhammas are not self" as opposed to saying -- all sankharas are not self -- is to include both the conditioned and unconditioned (nibbana). The second quote is merely making a point regarding particular misconceivings of what Nibbana means; ie, various false views. 18245 From: Date: Fri Dec 27, 2002 6:49pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Anatta - View of some scholars Hi TG, This quote, "Quote: -- "dhamma" includes both the conditioned and the unconditioned." is Ven. Bodhi's comment and he follows this with, "This interpretation, however, is not endorsed by the commentaries of Acariya Buddhagosa." Larry 18246 From: James Date: Fri Dec 27, 2002 7:02pm Subject: [dsg] Re: Significant Event --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, azita gill wrote: > --- "James " < > > dear James, > In the past I did not tear my hair out re some > of your posts -- I just did not read them - press the > delete button and you were gone! > However, I have been reading some of your > later posts and really like them - esp. the very > sensitive and caring letters that you have written to > the Star Kids. I have also benefited from them. > I am enjoying Nina's posts on patience - > Khanti - and thought that you have must have patience > to answer the Star Kids' letters. > Seems like we need LOTS of patience to develop > right understanding of this present moment. I have > been listening to tapes that were recorded while we > were in Thailand and K.Sujin constantly reminds us to > stay with this present moment and that clinging takes > us away from this moment, again and again. > I remind ple. to have patience, courage and > good cheer, but I think I am only just beginning to > see the real value in developing patience - the > supreme purification of body, speech and mind. > Thanks James, > Cheers, Azita Azita and All, You would actually delete my posts when you received them? Hehehe… That cracks me up! Good for you!! Better to delete my posts than to let them bother you. Well, I am not sure if I am terribly different now than when I began posting. Granted, my posts to the Star Kids are sweet, genuine, caring, creative, and more insightful than my posts to adult members most of the time. Why is that? I relate better with most kids more than most adults. Many adults (not all) seem to have too many hidden agendas, defensiveness, inferiority complexes, `know-it- all'ness, and insincerity. Most kids (not all) are like blank slates asking questions in a pure and straightforward way. Even when they disagree, it is not usually because they want to disprove someone else, they just don't agree. With adults, it is often a game of intellectual `king of the hill', and many people for reasons I have yet to understand often target me as someone to knock down. Azita, you did the right thing. If I rub you the wrong way, just delete my post. That should be the end of problem. But many adults are not insightful enough to do that. I have been banned (permanently and temporarily) from at least four other Buddhist/spiritual groups (two Buddhist, one gay Buddhist, one gay Pagan). I have received more hate mail from Buddhists than most would think possible. Was this entirely their fault? No, I think it was predominately my fault because I didn't have the patience you credit me with. One snotty post got another one in return from me, until it snowballed and I was finally kicked out or sanctioned. When it comes to a `war of words' I rarely lose and rarely give in. Not very wise on my part. Thankfully, DSG has predominately wise members who don't play `one-upmanship' (except a few new members who are pushing it lately) and is under the wise leadership of Sarah and Jon…who both have patience in abundance. Patience is indeed one the greatest virtues a person can cultivate. And it is just about the hardest thing to practice; but so very important. Patience is so difficult to have because just think about what it requires: humility, wisdom, compassion, love, selflessness, energy, dedication, faith, empathy, etc., etc., etc.,. Azita, you credit me far too much with the declaration that I have patience. I am still working on that one immensely; but I thank you all the same and am glad that my recent posts don't inspire you to delete `me' anymore…like some kind of voodoo doll destroyed in effigy ;-). I know I am going on about patience, but I think it is so important. I want to relate one more thing. These days I am reminded of an episode of 60 minutes I saw several years ago. In that episode, sociology researchers decided to conduct a longitudinal study of a group of six-year-olds. The study was to see the effect of patience in a person's life. They took each child into a room, put a small bowl of three M&Ms in front of him or her, and gave the following instructions: `I am going to leave the room. You are to stay in this chair and wait for me. If you want, you can eat these M&Ms, but if you can wait until I get back, I will give you five more.' Then the researcher left the child alone in the room for five minutes with nothing to do except stare at these candies. Some of them ate the candy right away; some of them waited a few minutes and ate the candy; and some of them waited the whole time to receive more candy. These children were re-visited 10, 15, and 20 years later to see how they were progressing in life. The majority of those who could not wait had a very hard life filled with drug abuse, crime, inability to maintain relationships, and personal dissatisfaction. The majority of those who could wait were very successful, highly educated, and had a great deal of personal satisfaction. Can we all wait before eating our three candies? So much rests on just that one thing. Metta, James 18247 From: James Date: Fri Dec 27, 2002 7:54pm Subject: Re: Dhamma Issues, Ch 2, Fruition-attainment, no 1 --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "nidive " wrote: > Dear James, > I don't agree that nibbana is undefinable. If it were undefinable, I > am sure the Buddha would have said that it is undefinable. Hi NEO, I replied to some of your comments in-text and follow up with some source information: I don't agree that nibbana is undefinable. If it were undefinable, I am sure the Buddha would have said that it is undefinable. But he didn't. Instead he gave us various descriptions of it through various suttas from the Tipitaka. And he never mentioned that nibbana is undefinable (not any sutta I know of). I am pretty sure the idea of nibbana as undefinable originates from the Mahayana school of teaching. I don't agree that nibbana is foreign to the mind of an ariyan. Nibbana is known by any ariyan. How is nibbana known? It is by means of the impermanent mind that nibbana is known. And it was through that that the Buddha was able to give us a description of nibbana. If nibbana was not known by the impermanent mind of the Buddha, we are all discussing about nibbana in vain. Supposing there is a kind of animal that no man had ever seen. How are we going to 'define' such an unknown animal? Something which is not known by the mind cannot be 'defined'. Similarly, a non-ariyan cannot 'define' nibbana simply because his mind does not know nibbana. But an ariyan can 'define' nibbana simply because his mind does know nibbana. > Definable charactersitics come from thoughts, but nibbana is > non-thought; so it cannot be defined or described. But I am sure that the following sutta quote comes from the thoughts of the Buddha: "This is peace, this is exquisite -- the resolution of all fabrications, the relinquishment of all acquisitions, the ending of craving; dispassion; cessation; Nibbana." -- AN III.32 I am sure that the Buddha does know nibbana. I am sure that the Buddha is Fully Self-Enlightened. I am sure that if nibbana is undefinable, the Buddha would have said so. It is too important a subject for him to keep silent. Okay, I am rather busy with my niece so I don't have the time to track down the original suttas this article refers to and analyze them; thankfully, the work has already been done for me. Here is unequivocal proof that the Buddha and his enlightened monks/nuns said that it is impossible to describe Nibbana or Parinibbana, and why, from "Buddhist Women at the Time of the Buddha" by Hellmuth Hecker : "…Khema tried to explain this to the King with a simile. She asked him whether he had a clever mathematician or statistician, who could calculate for him how many hundred, thousand or hundred-thousand grains of sand are contained in the river Ganges. The King replied that that is not possible. The nun then asked him whether he knew of anyone who could figure out how many gallons of water are contained in the great ocean. That, too, the King considered impossible. Khema asked him why it is not possible. The King replied that the ocean is mighty, deep, unfathomable. Just so, said Khema, is the Exalted One. Whoever wished to define the Awakened One, could only do so through the five clung-to aggregates and the Buddha no longer clung-to them. "Released from clinging to form, feeling, perception, mental formations and consciousness is the Enlightened One, mighty, deep unfathomable as the great ocean." Therefore it was not appropriate to say he existed or did not exist, or existed and did not exist, nor did he neither exist nor not exist. All these designations could not define what was undefinable. Just that was liberation: liberation from the compulsion to stabilize as "self" the constant flux of the five aggregates, which are never the same in any given moment, but only appear as a discharge of tensions arising from mental formations. The King rejoiced in the penetrating explanation of the nun Khema. Later on he met the Enlightened One and asked him the same four questions. The Buddha explained it exactly as Khema had done, even using the same words. The King was amazed and recounted his conversation with the wise nun Khema, the Arahant. (S 44,1)" http://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/bps/wheels/wheel292.html Metta, James 18248 From: James Date: Fri Dec 27, 2002 7:58pm Subject: Re: Anatta - View of some scholars --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "phamdluan2000 " wrote: > > Dear James, > > > But the self you refer to as > << individually the aggregates are non-self, > but maybe together they are self >> > is the << empirical self >> ! > > Peace, > > > KKT Hi KKT, I didn't refer to any such thing! I stated that the scholars Rahula quoted are using that argument, which I disagreed with. Hmmmm...was I unclear? My apologies. Metta, James 18249 From: phamdluan2000 Date: Fri Dec 27, 2002 9:01pm Subject: Re: Anatta - View of some scholars Dear James, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "James " wrote: > Dear James, > > > But the self you refer to as > << individually the aggregates are non-self, > but maybe together they are self >> > is the << empirical self >> ! > > Peace, > > > KKT Hi KKT, I didn't refer to any such thing! I stated that the scholars Rahula quoted are using that argument, which I disagreed with. Hmmmm...was I unclear? My apologies. Metta, James KKT: Thanks for the clarification. It's my fault to not carefully read. Sometimes I think in using such medium people understand each other at best 30% :-)) Metta, KKT 18250 From: phamdluan2000 Date: Fri Dec 27, 2002 9:10pm Subject: Re: Anatta - View of some scholars Dear Christine --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "christine_forsyth " wrote: Hi Rahula, James, KKT, TG, Larry, and All, A few quotes on self and Self - (Buddha-nature, Dharma-body, rigpa and Nibbana get a mention as well). < snip > KKT: Thank you very much for those interesting quotes. I'm particularly interested in the following one: Thanissaro Bhikkhu says in his Translators Note to the Mulapariyaya sutta: "there has long been -- and still is -- a common tendency to create a "Buddhist" metaphysics in which the experience of emptiness, the Unconditioned, the Dharma-body, Buddha-nature, rigpa, etc., is said to function as the ground of being from which the "All" -- the entirety of our sensory & mental experience -- is said to spring and to which we return when we meditate. Some people think that these theories are the inventions of scholars without any direct meditative experience, but actually they have most often originated among meditators, who label (or in the words of the discourse, "perceive") a particular meditative experience as the ultimate goal, identify with it in a subtle way (as when we are told that "we are the knowing"), and then view that level of experience as the ground of being out of which all other experience comes. " Peace, KKT 18251 From: christine_forsyth Date: Fri Dec 27, 2002 9:18pm Subject: Cankers/clingings/tendencies/fetters/defilements etc. vs Perfections Dear Group, I was thinking about the year to come, and the significance of New Year's Eve and the resolutions most people make. Usually the Resolutions are to decrease some qualities/behaviours seen as unwholesome (drinking, smoking, harsh speech) or to increase some qualities/behaviours seen as wholesome (thinking before one speaks, being kinder and more generous.). Just to help you prepare your List, here is what the Buddha taught were the Unwholesome things to be discouraged, and eradicated (rather depressingly, in so many lists and under so many different names). Does any list seem easier than the others? :-)): 3 floods, oghas a.k.a. 3 yokes, yoghas - sense-desire (kamasava), of (desiring eternal ) existence (bhavasava), and of ignorance (avijjasava). 4 cankers, asavas - sense-desire (kamasava), of (desiring eternal ) existence, (bhavasava), (wrong) views (ditthasava), and ignorance (avijjasava). 4 ties, ganthas - the bodily tie (kayagantha), covetousness (abhijjha), ill-will (vyapada), clinging to rule and ritual (silabbata-paramasa), of dogmatical fanaticism (idamsaccabhinivesa) 4 ways of clinging, upadanas - sensuous clinging (kamupadana), clinging to views (dittupadana), clinging to mere rules and ritual (silabbatupadana), clinging to the personality-belief (atta- vadupadana) 5 hindrances, nivaranas - sensuous desire (kamacchanda), ill-will (vyapada), sloth and torpor (thina-middha), restlessness and scruples (uddhacca-kukkucca) and sceptical doubt (vicikiccha). 7 latent tendencies, anusayas - sensuous greed (kama-raga), grudge (patigha), speculative opinion (ditthi), sceptical doubt (vicikiccha), conceit (mana), craving for continued existence (bhavaraga), ignorance (avijja). 10 fetters, samyojanas - personality-belief (sakkaya-ditthi), sceptical doubt (vicikiccha), clinging to mere rules and ritual (silabbata-paramasa) sensuous craving (kama-raga), ill-will (vyapada), craving for fine-material existence (rupa-raga), craving for immaterial existence (arupa-raga), conceit (mana), restlessness (uddhacca), ignorance (avijja). 10 defilements, kilesas - greed (lobha), hate (dosa), delusion (moha), conceit (mana), speculative views (ditthi), sceptical doubt (vicikiccha), mental torpor (thina), restlessness (uddhacca), shamelessness (ahirika), lack of moral dread or unconscientiousness (anottappa). And what the Buddha taught were the ten Wholesome qualities to be encouraged and increased: The Paramis - The Perfection of Giving (dana-parami) The Perfection of Morality (sila-parami) The Perfection of Renunciation (nekkhamma-parami) The Perfection of Wisdom (panna-parami) The Perfection of Energy (viriya-parami) The Perfection of Patience (khanti-parami) The Perfection of Truthfulness (sacca-parami) The Perfection of Resolution (adhitthana-parami) The Perfection of Loving-kindness (metta-parami) The Perfection of Equanimity (upekkha-parami). metta, Christine 18252 From: nidive Date: Sat Dec 28, 2002 6:03am Subject: Re: Dhamma Issues, Ch 2, Fruition-attainment, no 1 Hi James, But in AN III.32, he explained what it IS. I am sure there are numerous scholars who have turned the pages of the Tipitaka over and over again. If there were any suttas where the Buddha said that nibbana is undefinable, I should have read them at AccessToInsight. After all, nibbana is such an important topic. If nibbana is undefinable, the Buddha would have asked his Bikkhus to shut up, because discussions about nibbana would be unprofitable. Is there any Vinaya rule that says something to that effect? Those Mahayana Buddhists as indeed poor and misguided anyway. James, I appreciate your effort in finding this sutta. But Bikkhuni Khema was not talking about nibbana. She was talking about self- views. All four questions asked by the King have self-view as a requisite. That was why all four questions were rejected by the Buddha. Bikhuni Khema said: "Released from clinging to form, feeling, perception, mental formations and consciousness is the Enlightened One, mighty, deep, unfathomable as the great ocean." But she did NOT say: "Released from clinging to form, feeling, perception, mental formations and consciousness is nibbana, mighty, deep, unfathomable as the great ocean." Clearly, the Enlightened One, though unbound, is not equivalent to nibbana. Bikkhuni Khema did not say that nibbana is mighty, deep, unfathomable as the great ocean. The purpose of this sutta is to eliminate self-views. The King clearly sees the Enlightened One as possessing a self by reference to the four questions he asked. Bikkhuni Khema was trying to 'divert' the King away from self-views. The statement "Released from clinging to form, feeling, perception, mental formations and consciousness is the Enlightened One, mighty, deep, unfathomable as the great ocean." does not have self-views as a requisite. I would not comment on what was written by the author of this article. I only comment on what was said by Bikkhuni Khema. My interpretation of the sutta is different from that of the author of this article. Regards, NEO Swee Boon 18253 From: nidive Date: Sat Dec 28, 2002 7:15am Subject: Re: Dhamma Issues, Ch 2, Fruition-attainment, no 1 Hi James, > I would not comment on what was written by the author of this > article. I only comment on what was said by Bikkhuni Khema. My > interpretation of the sutta is different from that of the author > of this article. On second thought, I think it would be unskilful of me not to comment on this statement made by the author of this article. ... Therefore it was not appropriate to say he existed or did not exist, or existed and did not exist, nor did he neither exist nor not exist. All these designations could not define what was undefinable. ... It is inappropriate NOT because these designations could not define what was undefinable. It is inappropriate because these designations have self-views as the requisite. P.: Does an Awakened One exist after death? K.: The Exalted One has not declared that an Awakened One exists after death. P.: Then an Awakened One does not exist after death? K.: That too, the Exalted One has not declared. P.: Then the Awakened One exists after death and does not exist? K.: Even that, the Exalted One has not declared. P.: Then one must say, the Awakened One neither exists nor not exists after death? K.: That too, the Exalted One has not declared. If the Buddha had not declared, how could the author of this article declare as undefinable what the Buddha had not declared? It is like stuffing words into the Buddha's mouth when the Buddha had not even opened his mouth to speak. Regards, NEO Swee Boon 18254 From: nina van gorkom Date: Sat Dec 28, 2002 10:32am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Significant Event Dear James. :-) :-) op 26-12-2002 21:23 schreef James op buddhatrue@y...: I want to express my appreciation to `that Nina person' > for providing a role model of `Dhamma Dedication'. I hope everyone is > learning as much as I am. 18255 From: nina van gorkom Date: Sat Dec 28, 2002 10:32am Subject: Re: [dsg] Photo album Hi, I could nopt stop laughing. Nina. op 27-12-2002 17:33 schreef James op buddhatrue@y...: > > I tried to remove the grain in Peter's picture. I was successful to > some extent. I think it looks much better and gives a good idea of > Peter's visage (I can just hear him saying `Cheers!') As requested, > I also removed your gray hair. Additionally, I took the opportunity > to give you a more forceful appearance. I don't think anyone will > mess with you after they see this photo!! ;-) I also, for the > holiday season, fixed up a picture of Howard. It captures his Jolly > Spirit!! 18256 From: nina van gorkom Date: Sat Dec 28, 2002 10:32am Subject: Re: [dsg] Space element Steve, See below op 27-12-2002 07:27 schreef Bodhi2500@a... op Bodhi2500@a...: > > Abhidhammattha Sangaha Ch VIII, section 4, on pannattis: > vii) concept of space (akasa), such as a well or a cave. It is > derived from space which is not contacted by the four Great Elements. > >> From the Bahudhatuka Sutta M.> > > There are Ananda these 6 elements:The earth,water,fire,air,space and > consciousness element. > > > Could someone please explain what this space element is, is it a Paramattha > Dhamma or Pannatti/the concept of space as above ? Nina:space is a quality of rupa which delimits the kalapas, groups of rupa. There is space in between them so that they are distinct. When we read that space cannot be cut or ploughed, it is a conventional way of explaining its characteristic. There is space in the ear, a condition for hearing sound. I do not need to think, is this a concept or reality. It clarifies realities for me. Nina. 18257 From: nina van gorkom Date: Sat Dec 28, 2002 10:32am Subject: Re: [dsg] Way 30, Synopsis, sunnatavara Larry, op 27-12-2002 04:26 schreef LBIDD@w... op LBIDD@w...: > > It looks to me like this section opens the contemplation of > consciousness and dhammas to include all the fine details and many ways > of classifying them of the abhidhamma. Does anyone know what text this > line refers to and what it means: > > "the instruction of the portion dealing with the void in the Abhidhamma > proceeded by means of the statement beginning with "At that time indeed > there are phenomena, there are aggregates [yam vibhavetum abhidhamme > tasmim kho pana samaye dhamma honti khandha hantiti adina > suññatavara desana pavatta]], without any mention of a soul" Nina: the subco has: su~n~natadhammassaati ``dhammaa hontii''tiaadinaa (dhammasangani 121) su~n~natavaare aagatasu~n~natasabhaavassa vasena. Now I go to: Dhammasangani, p. 30. 31, Emptiness section (sunnatavaro): Now, at that time there are states... khandhas,ayatanas (spheres), elements, etc. these are states (dhammaa honti) that are good (kusala). Now I go to: Explanation by the Atthasalini, Expositor,I, Part IV, Ch IV, p. 206: Of the section on the void or emptiness: <...And here there are only states (dhammas); no permanent being, no soul is known These (fiftysix states) are mere states without essence, without a guiding principle. And it is to show the emptiness of this that they are stated here also.Therefore the meaning should here be thus regarded. At what time the first main type of moral consciousness (kusala citta) experienced in the realm of sense arises, at that time, by virtue of being factors in consciousness, the fifty and more states which have arisen are ultimate things. There is nothing else whatever, neither a being, nor an individuality, nor a man nor a person. Likewise they are aggregates in the sense of groups...> Now straight after this explanation in the Expositor something of interest for Howard: There is Jhana, there is Path, in that way they were enumerated in the list in the Dhsg. But now about jhana factors: in this context, the jhana facors developed in samatha are referred to. But the word jhana factor can also be used in a more general sense: they also accompany akusala citta. Thinking, vitakka performs its function so that lobha-mula-citta views the object closely, it conditions the accompanying dhammas by way of jhana-condition. This is one of the twentyfour main conditions. See Ven. Nyanaponika: Abhidhamma Studies. Nina. 18258 From: nina van gorkom Date: Sat Dec 28, 2002 10:32am Subject: Dhamma Issues, 2, Fruition Attainment, no 3. Dhamma Issues, 2, Fruition Attainment, no 3. 3. The Saddhammappakåsiní, Commentary to the Paìisambhidåmagga, Path of Discrimination, Khuddaka Nikåya, explains that the ariyan who can enter fruition-attainment must have attained jhåna. We read in the Commentary to Ch XXXIII, Abiding without Conflict (Arana Vihåra, peaceful abiding) about the understanding of peaceful abiding (arana vihåra). It explains about the arana vihåra dhammas as the means to be without defilements which are like enemies or cause beings to cry and lament. It states that the ariyans who can enter fruition attainment must have attained jhåna; only then can they be intent upon fruition-attainment. As it is said: ³ Panítådhimutta, they are intent upon fruition attainment. (panítå means: excellent, superior, what does not cause agitation and leads to predominance (8; adhimutta means: to be intent upon, inclined to). The inclination and disposition to fruition-attainment is called paùítådhimutta. It is the inclination to fruition-attainment which is subtle and refined. Paùítådhimutta is here actually the prerequisite 9 for paññå which is intent upon fruition-attainment.² At another part we read, ³ In the explanation of the first jhåna etc., the Commentator assists in explaining in the same way the term panítådhimutta.² In another part in the Commentary, in the explanation of ³Understanding of Peaceful Abiding², arana vihåra ñåna, we read about the arahat entering into fruition-attainment: ²With the words pathamam jhånam, the first jhåna, he speaks about the attainment of jhåna (jhåna samåpatti) which is the object of vipassanå of someone wanting to enter fruition-attainment of the stage of the arahat.² Even the arahat who does not have the hindrances, when he wants to enter fruition-attainment, he must have calm of citta of the degree of jhåna, from the first stage of jhåna onwards, and this is arana vihåra, peaceful abiding. We read: ³The meaning of the words Œpathamena jhånena nívarane harati ti, arana vihåro¹, is as follows: it is called arana vihåra, peaceful abiding, because it removes the hindrances by the first jhåna. It is explained that the first jhåna is called peaceful abiding because the factors which constitute the first jhåna remove the hindrances (nívarane harati). The other words of the text also explain this in the same way. One should know that the first jhåna has been referred to as removing the hindrances because the first jhåna is opposed to the hindrances and this is said also with regard to the arahat who does not have them anymore.² We read further on: ²...Jhåna attainment which is the foundation for vipassanå of fruition attainment². This clearly shows that in order to enter fruition-attainment one must be able to attain jhåna. footnotes: 8. We read in the ³Path of Discrimination², Ch XXXIII, Abiding without conflict about the predominance of seeing: that contemplation of impermanence, dukkha and anattå is predominance of seeing. The Commentary explains that seeing here is insight knowledge. 9. Paññå accompanying jhånacitta. 18259 From: James Date: Sat Dec 28, 2002 11:20am Subject: NEO of The Matrix (Was:Re: Dhamma Issues...etc.) Hi NEO, Wow! You are a good sparing partner! Okay, round two of the intellectual combat. Are you prepared? To paraphrase what Morpheus tells NEO in the movie `The Matrix', `You think I am stronger than you because I have a bigger body. That is not what matters. The sizes of our bodies are illusion; the mind is the only thing that is real.' In other words, the size of our arguments and sutta references are illusion also. The mind is the only thing that is real. Additionally, ss Morpheus says to Neo in the movie, "There's a difference between knowing the path and walking the path." (Ignoring the bloodshed, The Matrix is one of my favorite Buddhist movies. I am looking forward to the sequels coming out this summer.) Neo, you write: "Bikhuni Khema said: "Released from clinging to form, feeling, perception, mental formations and consciousness is the Enlightened One, mighty, deep, unfathomable as the great ocean." But she did NOT say: "Released from clinging to form, feeling, perception, mental formations and consciousness is nibbana, mighty, deep, unfathomable as the great ocean." Clearly, the Enlightened One, though unbound, is not equivalent to nibbana. Bikkhuni Khema did not say that nibbana is mighty, deep, unfathomable as the great ocean." This is where you make your great mistake in thinking. You are taking the `illusionary' as real. It isn't. You think I am real and you are real. We aren't real. Nibbana is the only thing that is real. What is Nibbana? Release from the unreal. Who was released from the unreal? The Buddha. What is the difference between the Buddha and Nibbana? NONE. Furthermore, what causes the unreal? Stress and agitation from ignorance, desire for existence, and craving cause the unreal. What are the characteristics of Nibbana? From the perspective of our unreal existence: Profound peace or calm. As the Buddha said, in the sutta you like, `"This is peace, this is exquisite -- the resolution of all fabrications, the relinquishment of all acquisitions, the ending of craving; dispassion; cessation; Nibbana." Is this a description for the characteristics of nibbana? You seem to think so, but I disagree. You seem to think that Nibbana is like a secret knowledge that the Buddha had that the rest of us have to learn. Nope, that isn't the point. Nibbana isn't 'knowing' anything specific, it is releasing the mind from the very thing that formed it. Let me use an analogy to explain what I think the mind of the Buddha was like. He saw that we are all composed of five pieces, like a jigsaw puzzle with five pieces. He was able to disassemble those five pieces when he went into the highest Jhanic states and rest in pure nibbana without the aggregates assembled. However, he could also put the pieces back together so that he could deal and interact mentally with the mundane world. But with the pieces together, that didn't mean he had lost Nibbana, he still had it all the time because he knew that he was just five pieces to an illusionary jigsaw puzzle. He could remove one piece at a time, change the pieces, and manipulate them anyway he saw fit. He was nibbana. When he died, he entered the highest jhanic state, thus breaking apart the five pieces of the puzzle, and let them finally disappear. He entered parinibbana, without the aggregates any longer. He could have done this sooner, but decided to stick around for 45 years to teach the rest of us about our jigsaw puzzles. Now, you and I think our jigsaw puzzle is one thing and the complete picture of reality. We cannot begin to think outside of what that puzzle shows us. The Buddha could go between Nibbana and Samsara at will. He saw that Samsara is an illusion, we see it as real. We cannot know nibbana while we still see samsara as real. As Morpheus explains to Neo in `The Matrix': "As long as the Matrix exists, the human race will never be free." As long as a human is stuck in samsara, it cannot know or be in nibbana. Does this apply to all humans? If all humans were liberated would samsara cease to exist completely? This possibility applies to your comment about Mahayana Buddhists, which I will address at a later time. I have some other things to do today. Metta, James 18260 From: Date: Sat Dec 28, 2002 6:38am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Anatta - View of some scholars “It is impossible, it cannot happen that a person possessing right view could treat anything as self – there is no such possibility.â€? (The Buddha. . . Middle Length Discourses of the Buddha (Majjhima Nikaya), pg.928, Bahudhatuka Sutta, The Many Kinds of Elements.) Hi Larry and other "not self" contemplators... I wasn't quite sure whether this quote was in dispute or the translation of it perhaps. It seems as clear as clear can be. The argument that the term sankhara was changed to dhamma in the infamous quote -- "All conditioned things (sankharas) are impermanent, all conditioned things (sankharas) are dukkha, all things (dhammas) are not self" -- to include such things as "concepts" makes no sense. Concepts would fall under the category of sankhara's as they are conditioned phenomena. And certainly from an Abhidhamma point of view, where dhammas are considered ultimate realities, there would be no reason to include concepts under the heading "dhammas." However, one would expect to include Nibbanna under that heading. There is another quote from the 4 Great Nikayas (not sure of exactly where) where the Buddha says that -- the 5 aggregates are not self and there is no other reasonable place to look for a self other than (outside of) the 5 aggregates. In other words...there isn't a self anywhere to be found. (Perhaps our friend Ray might know the exact spot of this quote?) It seems that "self view" is so dominating that people want to look for it in every possible nook and cranny. Just a few more thoughts on the subject. TG 18261 From: Date: Sat Dec 28, 2002 0:14pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Way 30, Synopsis, sunnatavara Hi Nina, Thanks for the research. I didn't follow what "kusala" had to do with it, but the main point seemed to be that "atta", self, wasn't listed among the list of 52 ultimate dhammas. It's interesting that citta process is contemplated under cittanupassana and dhammanupassana and own characteristic and general characteristic (tilakkhana) are only contemplated under dhammanupassana. Although I'm sure one could see that body, feeling, or consciousness are not self while practicing those mindfulnesses. Btw, it occured to me that "mindfulness" in the sense of attentiveness is a better translation of "anupassana" than of "sati". I'm thinking of the "look at" definition of anupassana here. "Mindfulness" in the sense of being mindful of kusala dhamma or mindful of the truth would fit "sati". What do you think? Larry 18262 From: Date: Sat Dec 28, 2002 0:24pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Anatta - View of some scholars Hi TG, Abhidhamma doesn't consider concepts to be sankhara because it doesn't consider them to be impermanent. Thinking about concepts and what we understand by a certain concept are impermanent but the concept itself is not, at least according to the abhidhamma system. Larry 18263 From: Kom Tukovinit Date: Sat Dec 28, 2002 0:41pm Subject: RE: [dsg] Re: Anatta - View of some scholars Dear Larry & TG, > -----Original Message----- > From: LBIDD@w... [mailto:LBIDD@w...] > > Hi TG, > > Abhidhamma doesn't consider concepts to be > sankhara because it doesn't > consider them to be impermanent. Thinking about > concepts and what we > understand by a certain concept are impermanent > but the concept itself > is not, at least according to the abhidhamma system. > The Abhidhamma lists concept as something that doesn't have its distinct characteristics (sabhava), i.e., it doesn't exist, at least not in the same way as feeling, sanna, citta, etc, does. Because it doesn't exist, it doesn't arise or fall away. It's not really permanent, or impermanent (because it doesn't exist). This is in contrast to all the other categories of sankhara dhammas, and visankhara dhammas (nibbana), which have their own distinct characteristics. kom 18264 From: peterdac4298 Date: Sat Dec 28, 2002 2:34pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Photo album --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "James " wrote: > I tried to remove the grain in Peter's picture. I was successful to > some extent. I think it looks much better and gives a good idea of > Peter's visage (I can just hear him saying `Cheers!') > The pics can be viewed at this link: > http://www.geocities.com/buddhatrue/dsg.htm > > Metta, James Thank you James for your kind effort. I finally gave up on the cheep digital cam, and went out and got a booth picture, which a local photographer's then put onto a floppy disk. It has been uploaded and replaces the original. Whilst it is a more accurate representation I somehow preferred the original grainy version: such is vanity. Cheers Peter 18265 From: Date: Sat Dec 28, 2002 4:06pm Subject: RE: [dsg] Re: Anatta - View of some scholars Hi Kom, It is true that according to Abhidhamma concepts are not paramattha dhammas but it would be incorrect to say concepts are not dhammas. Correct? If this is correct, the commentators would be correct in saying the word "dhamma" could includes both sankhara dhammas and concepts but the word "sankhara" would not include concepts. They simply didn't take up the question of the characteristics of nibbana in the passage we are discussing. I don't know, but perhaps the commentary to the "all dhammas are anatta" line that TG brought up follows this same kind of interpretation, refering to concepts rather than nibbana, as is commonly thought. This would coincide with Bhikkhu Bodhi"s assertion that the ancient commentaries as we have them from A. Buddhaghosa do not support the position that "dhammas" is meant to include nibbana here. Nibbana is of course a dhamma but there is no point to jumping to a conclusion on either side of the fence. Maybe we should send someone ahead to see what exactly nibbana is and they could report back. Larry 18266 From: James Date: Sat Dec 28, 2002 4:30pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Photo album --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "peterdac4298 " wrote: > Thank you James for your kind effort. > > I finally gave up on the cheep digital cam, and went out and got a > booth picture, which a local photographer's then put onto a floppy > disk. It has been uploaded and replaces the original. Whilst it is > a more accurate representation I somehow preferred the original > grainy version: such is vanity. > > Cheers > Peter Hi Peter! Oh thank you! You look dashing!!! What in the heck are you talking about?? If I weren't attached, I would probably start looking for cheap fares!! ;-) Wow! Don't look at the imperfections you see… look at the whole picture. I am. Quite a drink of water that is!! ;-) Metta, James 18267 From: vehapphala Date: Sat Dec 28, 2002 4:36pm Subject: Re: [dsg] New Member > From: > Hi, Beth - > ========================= > Welcome to the list from another member and an ex- Philadelphian! I was born in Philly *many* years ago, West Philly to be exact, and I remained there until my early 30's. snip.............................................. ..................................... > Are there any Theravadin groups, centers, wats, or other Theravadin > organizations in the area now? All I ever seem to see on lists are > non-Theravadin, Buddhist organizations in the Philly area. > > With metta, > Howard > ************************************** > Hello all, Hello Howard, > snip............................................ ................................ ... moved here to Blue Bell about five years ago. I've checked the web, only centers I've seen thus far aren't specifically Theravedan. > > ~peace, > Beth .................................................. .............................. 1. Hello. My first post. If any in error please advise and delete. 2. Live in USA, retired, and travel as much as possible. Plan to reside in Thailand. 3. When in the Philly area visit the Wat Thai Mongkoltepmunee in Bensalem, PA just north of Philly. The address is 3304 Knight Road. The phone number is 215.638.9755. All six Thai monks speak english. The acting abbot, Phra Maha Chewaa, currently is in southern Thailand because his father died recently. Phra Maha Suprit speaks the best english. 4. When in the DC area I visit Wat Thai DC in Springfield, MD. But, that may be too far for you. Will provide particulars should anyone request. 5. FWIW, I picked "vehapphala" as I may never attain this level much less nibbana. Perhaps, I should use, "puthujjana?" metta, Norm 18268 From: Date: Sat Dec 28, 2002 1:22pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Anatta - forget the scholars Hi Larry I'm still interested in your feedback on this quote that is directly attributed to the Buddha from the Majjhima Nikaya... “It is impossible, it cannot happen that a person possessing right view could treat anything as self – there is no such possibility.â€? (The Buddha. . . Middle Length Discourses of the Buddha, pg.928, Bahudhatuka Sutta, The Many Kinds of Elements.) TG 18269 From: christine_forsyth Date: Sat Dec 28, 2002 6:42pm Subject: Keeping Sila Dear Group, I have been reading around the topic of Sila, what Sila is, Keeping Sila, possible changes to Sila, and Sila as silabbataparamasa (clinging to sila and wrong practice). In the Kimmatha Sutta, the Buddha says that keeping Sila leads to arahantship. Seems pretty straight forward to me, unless there's a hidden meaning. 'Ven. Ananda went to the Blessed One and on arrival, having bowed down to him, sat to one side. As he was sitting there he said to the Blessed One: "What is the purpose of skillful virtues? What is their reward?" <<>> The Blessed One explained: "Ananda, skillful virtues lead step-by- step to the consummation of arahantship." ' http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/anguttara/an11-001.html Keeping Sila as the Suttas set it out sometimes seems to be presented as old-fashioned and outdated, clinging to rules, something that can change for those more advanced on the Way because of the higher level of panna that arises, something that can change with the times, or that can change with the mores of different cultures. I occasionally have the feeling some are implying that there is not just one wholesome Code of Conduct for all Buddhists, in the Training Rules. I almost feel that there is one way for the manyfolk but another way for those with greater understanding. The Buddha spoke of the eight rewards in AN VIII.39, Abhisanda Sutta 'Rewards'. They consisted of going for Refuge to the Buddha, Dhamma and Sangha, plus the five gifts (precepts). Isn't that a lovely term for the Precepts? http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/anguttara/an08-039.html "Now, there are these five gifts, five great gifts -- original, long- standing, traditional, ancient, unadulterated, unadulterated from the beginning -- that are not open to suspicion, will never be open to suspicion, and are unfaulted by knowledgeable contemplatives & priests. Which five? "There is the case where a disciple of the noble ones, abandoning the taking of life, abstains from taking life. In doing so, he gives freedom from danger, freedom from animosity, freedom from oppression to limitless numbers of beings. In giving freedom from danger, freedom from animosity, freedom from oppression to limitless numbers of beings, he gains a share in limitless freedom from danger, freedom from animosity, and freedom from oppression. This is the first gift, the first great gift -- original, long-standing, traditional, ancient, unadulterated, unadulterated from the beginning -- that is not open to suspicion, will never be open to suspicion, and is unfaulted by knowledgeable contemplatives & priests. And this is the fourth reward of merit..." Each of the other Precepts is taught and the words "original, long-standing, traditional, ancient, unadulterated, unadulterated from the beginning" are repeated each time. From an Abhidhamma perspective, can I integrate RobK's reminders in post 17647 and 17694, when he says, 'I think the only way is to really learn to see the characteristics of dhammas; then, so I believe, panna will know what is ultimately right or wrong; it is never us actually who is or is not keeping sila.' ... and ... 'Sila is a necessary part of the development of insight but sometimes we forget that sila is a really a very brief moment of conditioned nama. We tend to think I am keeping sila and that is still clinging to concept', by reference to the Cetana Sutta AN XI.2 'An Act of Will', http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/anguttara/an11-002.html "Skillful virtues have freedom from remorse as their purpose, freedom from remorse as their reward. In this way, mental qualities lead on to mental qualities, mental qualities bring mental qualities to their consummation, for the sake of going from the near to the Further Shore." ... or am I still missing something about how we are to live in this world? metta, Christine 18270 From: Date: Sat Dec 28, 2002 1:50pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Concepts are Sankhara IMO Irrespective of Abhidhamma's stance, I believe that concepts are sankhara. Concepts arise dependent on conditions and what is dependently originated in also impermanent. Test yourself...just try to generate a concept in your mind that is outside of any conditioned circumstance you have ever encountered. It is impossible. You will be able to image a different world, or experience, or different universal dimension...but they will all be just composites of things heard or experienced earlier. In other words, they will only be able to arise dependent on conditions. A concept is as only as good as a conceptual image currently existing in the mind...and they rise and fall continuously. There are no "free floating," "preexisting" concepts that permeate the universe IMO. Concepts just arise based on the conditions necessary for their generation. They are like a mental bubble that arise and cease very quickly based on conditions. That's the way I understand it. TG 18271 From: christine_forsyth Date: Sat Dec 28, 2002 6:54pm Subject: Re: New Member Hi Norm(vehapphala), Welcome. How interesting to have a 'deva/god of abundant fruit' on the list. :-) Perhaps, we may all see you in Thailand sometime? Do you have to use ordinary airplanes like the rest of we puthujjanas, or have you mastered the elbow bending and straightening trick of vanishing and reappearing? :-) metta, Christine --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "vehapphala " wrote: > 5. FWIW, I picked "vehapphala" as I may never attain this level much > less nibbana. Perhaps, I should use, "puthujjana?" > > metta, > > Norm 18272 From: Date: Sat Dec 28, 2002 7:20pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Anatta - forget the scholars "It is impossible, it cannot happen that a person possessing right view could treat anything as self -- there is no such possibility"? Hi TG, I read this to mean nothing could logically be considered to be self (atta). However, a Vedanta adept would agree. I hadn't followed this thread until the above quote caught my eye, so this may have already been settled. The main issue for me is whether nibbana is a mere cessation without reoccurance or an indesribable heaven-like underlayment that is revealed when akusala cittas finally cease. I don't see any other alternatives. Heaven sounds pretty good but if it is a mere cessation we might want to consider if that is really what we want. I'm inclined toward the cessation interpretation, but I haven't decided if that is what I really want or if there is an alternative other than dukkha. Cease or suffer, are those the only choices? Larry 18273 From: James Date: Sat Dec 28, 2002 9:50pm Subject: [dsg] Re: Anatta - forget the scholars --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, LBIDD@w... wrote: > Heaven sounds pretty good but if it is a mere cessation we might want to > consider if that is really what we want. I'm inclined toward the > cessation interpretation, but I haven't decided if that is what I really > want or if there is an alternative other than dukkha. Cease or suffer, > are those the only choices? > > Larry Hi Larry and All, Oh please, do not have fear or doubt! The path of the enlightened is like a light that shines more brilliant than all that we can know. I understand what you feel because I feel it also. The closer one gets to the answer, the more the fear of losing the familiar attacks. What is the solution? Faith!!!!!!!!! We all must have faith that the Buddha, with his infinite wisdom and compassion, would not lead us to an unsatisfactory state. Would the Buddha lead us astray? Of course not!! You know it and I know it! We feel toward the Buddha like we do our own mothers. We would/do crawl into his lap, hug him tight to us, and make him our comfort and shelter from all that is bad in the world. Did he want that? Of course he did!! The secret is to not let stupid thoughts, arising from ignorance but which seem so intelligent, get in the way of knowing the truth. Changing from a caterpillar into a butterfly is not an easy or quick process, but it is one that we all should/must go through. Does the Lord Buddha now exist? I am not completely sure, but I think so. Each time I read a profound sutta, I feel him. Each time I look at a Buddha staute, I feel him. Each time I bow in deference or raise my hands in wai, without a thought for myself, I feel him. Each time I enter a quiet Buddhist temple, where the air is still penetrated and hanging motionless with the wisdom of the faithful and the remaining wisdom of the Tathagata, I feel him. I think he must be there…somewhere. We won't stop existing when nibbana is reached, we will just exist in a way more brilliant and profound than the way we exist now. This is what I believe. Larry, I hope these words touch your heart and your mind…and those others reading. Don't doubt if the end should be reached. Please trust that what awaits is worth the effort to get there. Metta, James ps. I have so much else I want to post right now, but not the time. Though you may not care really, I do. I just wanted to say something. 18274 From: Date: Sat Dec 28, 2002 9:58pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Anatta - forget the scholars Hi James, Metta to you also. Larry 18275 From: Andrew Date: Sat Dec 28, 2002 10:37pm Subject: Re: Keeping Sila --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "christine_forsyth " wrote: > > Keeping Sila as the Suttas set it out sometimes seems to be > presented as old-fashioned and outdated, clinging to rules, something > that can change for those more advanced on the Way because of the > higher level of panna that arises, something that can change with the > times, or that can change with the mores of different cultures. > I occasionally have the feeling some are implying that there is not > just one wholesome Code of Conduct for all Buddhists, in the Training > Rules. I almost feel that there is one way for the manyfolk but > another way for those with greater understanding. > Hi Christine, Thanks for another thought-provoking post. I have no difficulty with the idea that, to an extent, sila is culturally-relative. For example, taking what is not given is a moral discipline that is likely to present very differently in an Australian Aboriginal context than a white North American context. Because of different ideas of ownership. Here is a quote from Bhikkhu Bodhi's "Noble Eightfold Path"; "Though the principles laid down in this section [sila] restrain immoral actions and promote good conduct, their ultimate purpose is not so much ethical as spiritual. They are not prescribed merely as guides to action, but primarily as aids to mental purification. As a necessary measure for human well-being, ethics has its own justification in the Buddha's teaching and its importance cannot be underrated. But in the special context of the Noble Eightfold Path, ethical principles are subordinate to the path's governing goal, final deliverance from suffering. Thus for the moral training to become a proper part of the path, it has to be taken up under the tutelage of the first two factors, right view and right intention, and to lead beyond to the trainings in concentration and wisdom." Happy New Year Andrew 18276 From: Andrew Date: Sat Dec 28, 2002 11:06pm Subject: Re: Tinker, Tailor, Soldier, Sailor.......lawyer, used car salesman --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "kenhowardau " wrote: In reality, there are no Red > Cross volunteers, no butchers, no occupations, just nama > and rupa . -- the real Right Livelihood can > occur anywhere at any time. It's hard to grasp and sometimes, > we don't want to grasp it. The main thing is that we're working > on it :-) > Hi KenH The above comment didn't seem right to me, not because of what it said (a very profound comment on anatta) but on what it implied (to me)for the mundane worldling. Can you in reality be a slaughterman and practice right livelihood? In "The Noble Eightfold Path", Bhikkhu Bodhi makes an interesting point that is relevant here: "Obviously any occupation that requires violation of right speech and right action is a wrong form of livelihood, but other occupations, such as selling weapons or intoxicants, may not violate those factors and yet be wrong because of their consequences for others." In the mundane world, perhaps there is a role for "tinker, tailor" lists after all? Bhikkhu Bodhi seems to think so. A slaughterman who practices right livelihood would have a very short career indeed. He would have to resign before the first swing of the poleaxe. Up until then, I suppose, he could indeed practice right livelihood. To mundane worldlings largely blind to the present moment and glimpsing it only in retrospect, we can but "work on" realising the relevance of nama-rupa. In the meantime, we may need some mundane prompting to look at what we do and its consequences for others. I hope you've surfed off your Christmas pudding and I look forward to seeing you soon! Andrew 18277 From: Date: Sat Dec 28, 2002 6:16pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Anatta - View of some scholars Hi, Kom and all - In a message dated 12/28/02 3:42:18 PM Eastern Standard Time, kom@a... writes: > > Dear Larry &TG, > > >-----Original Message----- > >From: LBIDD@w... [mailto:LBIDD@w...] > > > >Hi TG, > > > >Abhidhamma doesn't consider concepts to be > >sankhara because it doesn't > >consider them to be impermanent. Thinking about > >concepts and what we > >understand by a certain concept are impermanent > >but the concept itself > >is not, at least according to the abhidhamma system. > > > > The Abhidhamma lists concept as something that doesn't have > its distinct characteristics (sabhava), i.e., it doesn't > exist, at least not in the same way as feeling, sanna, > citta, etc, does. Because it doesn't exist, it doesn't > arise or fall away. It's not really permanent, or > impermanent (because it doesn't exist). > > This is in contrast to all the other categories of sankhara > dhammas, and visankhara dhammas (nibbana), which have their > own distinct characteristics. > > kom > =========================== Well, not having read from the Abhidhamma Pitaka itself, I can't confirm or deny the claim that this is the Abhidhammic position, but, in my opinion, if it *is*, then it is the result of confusing concepts with the alleged referents of concepts. Concepts per se are thoughts, and thoughts come and go, are modified, recreated, and replaced, and, in any case, are impermanent. The alleged referents of concepts, the pa~n~natti, are, in most cases, non-existent, though that does not make the thoughts themselves meaningless. The thoughts/concepts themselves, when they are "well grounded", are mental constructs that are packages of information serving as shortcut references for aggregates of interrelated dhammas. When one thinks in detail, fo example, about a specific tree which one "sees", one may realize that there is no single thing that is being "seen". What there is is a host of multiway processed images and visual perceptions (carvings out), overlayed, mentally composed, and mentally summed up to "the tree". That summing up is grounded in a host of interrelated experiences, and is, thus, not from "whole cloth", but to say that "the tree that is seen" is findable is false. At least, this is how I see the matter. With metta, Howard /Thus is how ye shall see all this fleeting world: A star at dawn, a bubble in a stream, a flash of lightning in a summer cloud, a flickering lamp, a phantom, and a dream./ (From the Diamond Sutra) 18278 From: nidive Date: Sat Dec 28, 2002 11:36pm Subject: NEO of The Matrix (Was:Re: Dhamma Issues...etc.) Hi James, > You seem to think that Nibbana is like a secret knowledge that > the Buddha had that the rest of us have to learn. Nibbana is indeed a secret knowledge that the Buddha had. If he had not taught anyone about it, it would remain forever a secret that only he knew. Nibbana cannot be learnt. Nibbana has to be KNOWN. > Nibbana isn't 'knowing' anything specific, it is releasing the > mind from the very thing that formed it. Nibbana has to be KNOWN. But nibbana itself is not equivalent to 'knowing' anything. The following suttas clearly shows that nibbana has to be KNOWN. -------------------------------------------------------- "I will teach you the penetrative explanation that is a Dhamma explanation. Listen & pay close attention. I will speak." "As you say, lord," the monks responded. The Blessed One said: "And which penetrative explanation is a Dhamma explanation? "Sensuality should be known. The cause by which sensuality comes into play should be known. The diversity in sensuality should be known. The result of sensuality should be known. The cessation of sensuality should be known. The path of practice for the cessation of sensuality should be known. "Feeling should be known. The cause by which feeling comes into play should be known. The diversity in feeling should be known. The result of feeling should be known. The cessation of feeling should be known. The path of practice for the cessation of feeling should be known. "Perception should be known. The cause by which perception comes into play should be known. The diversity in perception should be known. The result of perception should be known. The cessation of perception should be known. The path of practice for the cessation of perception should be known. "Fermentations (asava) should be known. The cause by which fermentations come into play should be known. The diversity in fermentations should be known. The result of fermentations should be known. The cessation of fermentations should be known. The path of practice for the cessation of fermentations should be known "Kamma should be known. The cause by which kamma comes into play should be known. The diversity in kamma should be known. The result of kamma should be known. The cessation of kamma should be known. The path of practice for the cessation of kamma should be known. "Stress should be known. The cause by which stress comes into play should be known. The diversity in stress should be known. The result of stress should be known. The cessation of stress should be known. The path of practice for the cessation of stress should be known. http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/anguttara/an06-063.html "And this, monks, is the noble truth of the cessation of dukkha: the remainderless fading & cessation, renunciation, relinquishment, release, & letting go of that very craving." -- SN XLVI.11 "This is peace, this is exquisite -- the stilling of all fabrications, the relinquishment of all acquisitions, the ending of craving, dispassion, cessation, Unbinding." -- MN 64 http://www.accesstoinsight.org/ptf/sacca3.html "This is peace, this is exquisite -- the resolution of all fabrications, the relinquishment of all acquisitions, the ending of craving; dispassion; cessation; Nibbana." -- AN III.32 http://www.accesstoinsight.org/ptf/nibbana.html KNOWING nibbana is equivalent to KNOWING the Third Noble Truth. -------------------------------------------------------- The Buddha is not equivalent to nibbana. The Buddha knows what is nibbana, but he himself is not nibbana. It is not that I perceive the Buddha to be real or possessing a self. For the Buddha was nothing but merely the five aggregates. At his death, the five aggregates are extinguished. Extinguished, there is no more becoming. When there is no more becoming, there is FINALITY. To say that the Buddha is equivalent to nibbana is to refuse to admit THAT FINALITY. It shows the continued desire for existence (for eternity). It complicates that which is non-complicated. Regards, NEO Swee Boon 18279 From: nidive Date: Sat Dec 28, 2002 11:52pm Subject: [dsg] Re: Anatta - forget the scholars Hi Larry, > The main issue for me is whether nibbana is a mere cessation > without reoccurance or an indesribable heaven-like underlayment > that is revealed when akusala cittas finally cease. I don't see > any other alternatives. http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/majjhima/mn044.html#beyond "What lies on the other side of Unbinding?" "You've gone too far, friend Visakha. You can't keep holding on up to the limit of questions. For the holy life plunges into Unbinding, culminates in Unbinding, has Unbinding as its final end. If you wish, go to the Blessed One and ask him the meaning of these things. Whatever he says, that's how you should remember it." Then Visakha the lay follower, delighting & rejoicing in what Dhammadinna the nun had said, bowed down to her and, keeping her to his right, went to the Blessed One. On arrival, having bowed down to the Blessed One, he sat to one side. As he was sitting there he told the Blessed One the full extent of the conversation he had had with Dhammadinna the nun. When this was said, the Blessed One said to him, "Dhammadinna the nun is wise, Visakha, a woman of great discernment. If you had asked me those things, I would have answered you in the same way she did. That is the meaning of those things. That is how you should remember it." That is what the Blessed One said. Gratified, Visakha the lay follower delighted in the Blessed One's words. 'Final End' means just that; cessation without reoccurrence. > Heaven sounds pretty good but if it is a mere cessation we might > want to consider if that is really what we want. I'm inclined > toward the cessation interpretation, but I haven't decided if > that is what I really want or if there is an alternative other > than dukkha. Cease or suffer, are those the only choices? http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/anguttara/an08-030.html Then Ven. Maha Kotthita went to Ven. Sariputta and, on arrival, exchanged courteous greetings with him. After an exchange of friendly greetings & courtesies, he sat to one side. As he was sitting there, he said to Ven. Sariputta, "With the remainderless stopping & fading of the six contact-media [vision, hearing, smell, taste, touch, & intellection] is it the case that there is anything else?" [Sariputta:] "Don't say that, my friend." [Maha Kotthita:] "With the remainderless stopping & fading of the six contact-media, is it the case that there is not anything else?" [Sariputta:] "Don't say that, my friend." [Maha Kotthita:] "...is it the case that there both is & is not anything else?" [Sariputta:] "Don't say that, my friend." [Maha Kotthita:] "...is it the case that there neither is nor is not anything else?" [Sariputta:] "Don't say that, my friend." [Maha Kotthita:] "Being asked if, with the remainderless stopping & fading of the six contact-media, there is anything else, you say, 'Don't say that, my friend.' Being asked if ... there is not anything else ... there both is & is not anything else ... there neither is nor is not anything else, you say, 'Don't say that, my friend.' Now, how is the meaning of your words to be understood?" [Sariputta:] "The statement, 'With the remainderless stopping & fading of the six contact-media [vision, hearing, smell, taste, touch, & intellection] is it the case that there is anything else?' complicates non-complication.[1] The statement, '... is it the case that there is not anything else ... is it the case that there both is & is not anything else ... is it the case that there neither is nor is not anything else?' complicates non-complication. However far the six contact-media go, that is how far complication goes. However far complication goes, that is how far the six contact media go. With the remainderless fading & stopping of the six contact-media, there comes to be the stopping, the allaying of complication. Note 1. See MN 18. As Sn IV.14 points out, the root of the classifications and perceptions of complication is the thought, "I am the thinker." This thought forms the motivation for the questions that Ven. Maha Kotthita is presenting here: the sense of "I am the thinker" can either fear or desire annihilation in the course of Unbinding. Both concerns get in the way of the abandoning of clinging, which is essential for the attainment of Unbinding, which is why the questions should not be asked. Yes, either cease or suffer. There are no other choices. Regards, NEO Swee Boon 18280 From: Kom Tukovinit Date: Sun Dec 29, 2002 0:28am Subject: RE: [dsg] Re: Anatta - View of some scholars Hi Howard, > -----Original Message----- > From: upasaka@a... [mailto:upasaka@a...] > Abhidhammic position, but, in my > opinion, if it *is*, then it is the result of > confusing concepts with the > alleged referents of concepts. Concepts per se > are thoughts, and thoughts > come and go, are modified, recreated, and > replaced, and, in any case, are > impermanent. The alleged referents of concepts, > the pa~n~natti, are, in most > cases, non-existent, though that does not make > the thoughts themselves > meaningless. From what I can understand from what you said above, I think we are only different in the use of words. When I use the word concept, it invariably means pannatti, which is neither nama nor rupa and doesn't have its distinct characteristic. I don't use the word concept for thought, or thinking, which in abhidhammic position, is quite real (having its distinct characteristics). This usage is probably (unless other people say otherwise) common in Nina's and K. Sujin's (translated) work. The abhidhamma system categorizes the object of cognition into 6 types: 1) Visible object 2) Sound 3) Smell 4) Taste 5) Tangible object (hard, soft, cold, hot, tension, vibration) 6) Dhammarmana (including all other paramatha, sankhara and visankhara, dhammas except the above 7, and concept). Whatever can be the object of the mind, but is not paramatha, is what I refer to as concept (pannatti). Howard, I hope this sits well with you in meaning, even if not in words. kom 18281 From: Kom Tukovinit Date: Sun Dec 29, 2002 1:09am Subject: RE: [dsg] Re: Anatta - View of some scholars Dear Larry, > -----Original Message----- > From: LBIDD@w... [mailto:LBIDD@w...] > > Hi Kom, > > It is true that according to Abhidhamma concepts > are not paramattha > dhammas but it would be incorrect to say concepts > are not dhammas. > Correct? I can definitely say that concepts (pannatti) are not paramatha. However, dhammas are used in so many different ways that I think the word by itself is very much contextual. The Buddha's teachings is called a dhamma, but yet the concept "teaching" is not paramatha. I think there are some cases that pannatti is referred to as dhamma as well. I think in some places, the commentaries would clarify the usage of dhamma in the particular context. > If this is correct, the commentators would be > correct in saying the word > "dhamma" could includes both sankhara dhammas and > concepts but the word > "sankhara" would not include concepts. They > simply didn't take up the > question of the characteristics of nibbana in the > passage we are > discussing. If concept doesn't even exist, how could it be a self? I probably would drive myself insane if I take something that (obviously) doesn't even exist as a self. I don't know what the commentators say, but I wouldn't be surprised if they include both sankhara dhammas, and concepts in dhamma. I am surprised that you (I think) say that nibbana is not included as part of dhamma (sorry, didn't follow the thread completely, will do so when I have a chance). I don't think we are going to remove our own doubt whether or not nibbana is anatta or not just by textual references / inferences alone. Unless we experience nibbana, we will always have the potential to have this doubt. However, I have seen how anatta is explained in the sutta in three different ways: 1) How could anything impermanent be atta? 2) How could anything dukkha be atta? 3) How could anything that you do not control (like a king controls his retinue), that is conditioned (for sankhara dhammas), be atta? The first two can be readily used to logically explain why there is no atta in the aggregates. The last one can be used to explain both the aggregates and nibbana, and is a bit harder to explain. I think of having no control in the following ways: 1) it is conditioned => without the right conditions, the dhamma doesn't arise regardless of what we want: this applies to all sankhara dhammas. 2) having its distinct (which nobody controls) characteristics => while a characteristic appears to the mind, there is nothing else in that characteristic. There is nothing else in anger except for the characteristics of anger. There is nothing else in nibbana except for the characteristics of nibbana. Of course, the characteristics of nibbana is just beyond our imagination, because we do not experience anything close to the extinguishment of all conditioned realities. But..., this argument only works if you think that nibbana has a characteristics. But as anything related to nibbana, this argument can go on for days without any clearer understanding related to this topic... kom 18282 From: christine_forsyth Date: Sun Dec 29, 2002 3:24am Subject: Re: Keeping Sila Hi Andrew, I understand your point about non-urban Aboriginal people and property. But I'm just not so sure about cultural relativism with respect to the Precepts. I have been reading Peter Harvey's Intro. to Buddhist Ethics and in the chapter on the shared foundations of Buddhist Ethics he says, "this assumes that there is such a thing as objectively wrong action. ... Given Buddhism's clear criteria of what is unwholesome action, it is quite happy to agree to this, with an action's 'wrongness' subsisting in a combination of the action itself and the state of mind in which it is done. It is not a matter of what a person happens to like or dislike (emotivism), or of what his or her society happens to approve or disapprove of (cultural relativism). (Keown, 1992: 64, 231-2). Thanks for the quotes you gave from Bhikkhu Bodhi where he says, in part: "for the moral training to become a proper part of the path, it has to be taken up under the tutelage of the first two factors, right view and right intention, and to lead beyond to the trainings in concentration and wisdom." However, outside of the special context of the Noble Eightfold Path, I would also agree with his remarks in the essay Nourishing the Roots (Wheel 259/260) "...the internal aspect is the more important from the standpoint of spiritual development, since bodily and verbal deeds acquire ethical significance primarily as expressions of a corresponding disposition of mind. In the sequence of spiritual training, however, it is moral discipline that comes first. For at the beginning of training, purification of character stands as an ideal which must be reached; it is not a reality with which one can start." metta, and a Happy New Year to all at Cooran, Christine --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Andrew " wrote: > --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "christine_forsyth > " wrote: > > > > Keeping Sila as the Suttas set it out sometimes seems to be > > presented as old-fashioned and outdated, clinging to rules, something > > that can change for those more advanced on the Way because of the > > higher level of panna that arises, something that can change with the > > times, or that can change with the mores of different cultures. > > I occasionally have the feeling some are implying that there is not > > just one wholesome Code of Conduct for all Buddhists, in the Training > > Rules. I almost feel that there is one way for the manyfolk but > > another way for those with greater understanding. > > > > Hi Christine, > Thanks for another thought-provoking post. I have no difficulty with > the idea that, to an extent, sila is culturally-relative. For > example, taking what is not given is a moral discipline that is likely > to present very differently in an Australian Aboriginal context than a > white North American context. Because of different ideas of ownership. > > Here is a quote from Bhikkhu Bodhi's "Noble Eightfold Path"; > "Though the principles laid down in this section [sila] restrain > immoral actions and promote good conduct, their ultimate purpose is > not so much ethical as spiritual. They are not prescribed merely as > guides to action, but primarily as aids to mental purification. As a > necessary measure for human well-being, ethics has its own > justification in the Buddha's teaching and its importance cannot be > underrated. But in the special context of the Noble Eightfold Path, > ethical principles are subordinate to the path's governing goal, final > deliverance from suffering. Thus for the moral training to become a > proper part of the path, it has to be taken up under the tutelage of > the first two factors, right view and right intention, and to lead > beyond to the trainings in concentration and wisdom." > Happy New Year > Andrew 18283 From: Ramindu Weeratna Date: Sun Dec 29, 2002 3:59am Subject: Re: [dsg] Prophetic tradition within Buddhism Sorry for the late reply Christine, Being able to see the future is not only done by Buddhas, I hear it was done by yogis in ancient times. Do u know of the teacher of king suddodana - Asita KalaDevala. he was a brakmana(non Buddhist) who had the Anagatassa gnana(the ability of seeing the future) That’s why he smiled & cried at the birth of Siddhartha. he saw that siddartha will attain Buddha hood. But he saw that he’ll not be living to see it. Buddhas can see the past as far as it gets & Buddhas can see the future Its not prediction. I’ve heard that in Thripitaka there's a place where Lord Buddha had mentioned of great personalities who came after his passing away, like king Ashoka,etc (any one know where exactly it is ?) Don’t take this as a all seeing & all hearing as with god. I’v heard that, Only & only when he wishes to see some thing, he uses the wisdom which is used to do it & it is reviled to him. Hope This Helps May u be well & happy With Metta Ram ----- Original Message ----- From: "christine_forsyth " Date: Wed, 25 Dec 2002 21:47:10 -0000 To: dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com Subject: [dsg] Prophetic tradition within Buddhism > Dear Group, > > In the Jataka Tales vol i (77) 'Mahasupina-Jataka' the sixteen > dreams of King Pasenadi are clarified by the Buddha. Each time he > makes a comment to the King along the lines of, "Sire, that dream > shall have no issue in your days or in mine....." "This dream too > shall have its fulfilment only in days to come ..." "Here again the > dream shall not have its fulfilment until the future, in the days of > unrighteous kins ..." > Is there any support in the Suttas for the belief that these dreams > were prophetic dreams about a future time, and that some of the > dreams could relate to events in this time period? > Is there a prophetic tradition within Buddhism? > > metta, > Christine 18284 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Sun Dec 29, 2002 6:09am Subject: Re: [dsg] Right livelihood (was, Tinker, Tailor ...) Andrew You asked: "Can you in reality be a slaughterman and practice right livelihood?" Like sila, right livelihood is a moment of abstention from 'wrongness'. So if a slaughterman abstains from wrong speech in the course of his livelihood, the wholesome mental state would be the one that is called 'right livelihood'. It may be more helpful to think in terms of (momentary) abstention from wrong livelihood than 'being in a right-livelihood or wrong-livelihood occupation' or 'practising right livelihood'. Jon --- "Andrew " wrote: > wrote: > > In reality, there are no Red > > Cross volunteers, no butchers, no occupations, just nama > > and rupa . -- the real Right Livelihood can > > occur anywhere at any time. It's hard to grasp and sometimes, > > we don't want to grasp it. The main thing is that we're working > > on it :-) > > > Hi KenH > The above comment didn't seem right to me, not because of what it > said > (a very profound comment on anatta) but on what it implied (to > me)for > the mundane worldling. Can you in reality be a slaughterman and > practice right livelihood? > > In "The Noble Eightfold Path", Bhikkhu Bodhi makes an interesting > point that is relevant here: > "Obviously any occupation that requires violation of right speech > and > right action is a wrong form of livelihood, but other occupations, > such as selling weapons or intoxicants, may not violate those > factors > and yet be wrong because of their consequences for others." > > In the mundane world, perhaps there is a role for "tinker, tailor" > lists after all? Bhikkhu Bodhi seems to think so. A slaughterman > who > practices right livelihood would have a very short career indeed. > He > would have to resign before the first swing of the poleaxe. Up > until > then, I suppose, he could indeed practice right livelihood. 18285 From: Date: Sun Dec 29, 2002 1:40am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Anatta - View of some scholars Hi, Kom - Yes, you are right. We are differing only in word usage, not content. With metta, Howard In a message dated 12/29/02 3:29:29 AM Eastern Standard Time, kom@a... writes: > Hi Howard, > > >-----Original Message----- > >From: upasaka@a... [mailto:upasaka@a...] > > >Abhidhammic position, but, in my > >opinion, if it *is*, then it is the result of > >confusing concepts with the > >alleged referents of concepts. Concepts per se > >are thoughts, and thoughts > >come and go, are modified, recreated, and > >replaced, and, in any case, are > >impermanent. The alleged referents of concepts, > >the pa~n~natti, are, in most > >cases, non-existent, though that does not make > >the thoughts themselves > >meaningless. > > From what I can understand from what you said above, I think > we are only different in the use of words. When I use the > word concept, it invariably means pannatti, which is neither > nama nor rupa and doesn't have its distinct characteristic. > I don't use the word concept for thought, or thinking, which > in abhidhammic position, is quite real (having its distinct > characteristics). This usage is probably (unless other > people say otherwise) common in Nina's and K. Sujin's > (translated) work. > > The abhidhamma system categorizes the object of cognition > into 6 types: > 1) Visible object > 2) Sound > 3) Smell > 4) Taste > 5) Tangible object (hard, soft, cold, hot, tension, > vibration) > 6) Dhammarmana (including all other paramatha, sankhara and > visankhara, dhammas except the above 7, and concept). > > Whatever can be the object of the mind, but is not > paramatha, is what I refer to as concept (pannatti). > Howard, I hope this sits well with you in meaning, even if > not in words. > > kom > > /Thus is how ye shall see all this fleeting world: A star at dawn, a bubble in a stream, a flash of lightning in a summer cloud, a flickering lamp, a phantom, and a dream./ (From the Diamond Sutra) 18286 From: nina van gorkom Date: Sun Dec 29, 2002 7:12am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Significant Event James, I like this, so good the see the connection of patience with all those other good qualities. We may just be fixed on patience and forget the connection. Nina op 28-12-2002 04:02 schreef James op buddhatrue@y...: > > Patience is indeed one the greatest virtues a person can cultivate. > And it is just about the hardest thing to practice; but so very > important. Patience is so difficult to have because just think about > what it requires: humility, wisdom, compassion, love, selflessness, > energy, dedication, faith, empathy, etc., etc., etc.,. 18287 From: nina van gorkom Date: Sun Dec 29, 2002 7:12am Subject: The Perfections, Ch 7, Patience, no 8 The Perfections, Ch 7, Patience, no 8 We read in the ³Discourse on the Analysis of the Elements² (Middle Length Sayings III, no 140): Thus have I heard: At one time the Lord, walking on tour among the people of Magadha, arrived at Råjagaha and approached the potter Bhaggava; having approached, he spoke thus to Bhaggava the potter: ³If it is not inconvenient to you, Bhaggava, I would spend one night in your dwelling.² ³It is not inconvenient 4, revered sir, but there is here one gone forth who came before you to stay. But if he allow it, do stay, revered sir, according to your pleasure.² We see the patience of the Buddha who wandered for the benefit of others, in teaching the Dhamma, so that he could help those who were able to realize the four noble Truths. He walked on tour in Magadha, he stopped in the city of Råjagaha and came to see the potter. He did not go to a place that was pleasant and confortable. He asked for a sleeping place in the potter¹s workshop just for one night. We read in the Commentary to this sutta, the ³Papañcasúdaní² that the potter Bhaggava thought: ³Monks usually have different inclinations: some like to keep company, and others like to be alone. If the monk who came here first is someone who wants to be alone, he will say, ŒRevered sir, do not enter here, because I am already in this dwelling¹, so that the person who comes afterwards will go away. If this would happen, both people would quarrel. Thus, what has been given should be considered as such, and what has been done cannot be altered.² Therefore, he said, ³It is not inconvenient 4, revered sir, but there is here one gone forth who came before you to stay. But if he allows it, do stay, revered sir, according to your pleasure.² We read further on in the Sutta: At that time there was a young man of family called Pukkusåti who had gone forth from home into homelessness through faith in the Lord. He was the person who had arrived first at that potter¹s dwelling. Then the Lord approached the venerable Pukkusåti: ³If it is not inconvenient to you, monk, I will spend a night in this dwelling.² ²Spacious, friend, is the potter¹s dwelling; let the venerable one stay according to his pleasure.² We read in the Commentary to this Sutta: King Pukkusåti reigned over his kingdom in the city of Takkasilå and King Bimbisåra reigned over his kingdom in the city of Rajagåha, and they were of the same age. Between them there was a deep bond of affection, although they had never seen each other. Their friendship was established by means of the merchants who travelled between their two countries for the purpose of trade. 18288 From: Date: Sun Dec 29, 2002 8:43am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Anatta - forget the scholars Hi Swee Boon, Thanks for the sutta references, very appropriate. Thinking about this further, it occurred to me that cares and concerns about the nature of nibbana can be seen, even now, as nonabiding and unreliable and therefore not self. So where does that leave us in regard to pathwise strategies? Nowhere. It's too late to be deluded. We already don't exist. Larry 18289 From: Date: Sun Dec 29, 2002 9:19am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Anatta - View of some scholars Hi Howard, I liked your explanation of the referents of concepts, very clear. In abhidhamma both names and their meanings are considered to be concepts, but their referents are considered to be either real or not [my guess]. There is a short piece on this in CMA. I'm still not super clear on what existence is. As Kom says, it is a matter of having (or being?) an "own nature" (sabhava or salakkhana). Still, existence seems pretty tenuous to me, considering the nature of sankhara. I guess the logic is that a compound has to be a compound of some "thing". Larry 18290 From: Date: Sun Dec 29, 2002 9:38am Subject: RE: [dsg] Re: Anatta - View of some scholars Hi Kom, Here's the note from B. Bodhi that started the controversy. Notice that he says the commentaries say "dhamma", in this case, means sankhara and concepts but don't say anything about nibbana. The sutta is the Bahudhatuka Sutta from MN. http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/message/18219 Larry 18291 From: Date: Sun Dec 29, 2002 4:55am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Anatta - forget the scholars In a message dated 12/28/2002 7:20:45 PM Pacific Standard Time, LBIDD@w... writes: > I hadn't followed this thread until the above quote caught my eye, so > this may have already been settled. The main issue for me is whether > nibbana is a mere cessation without reoccurance or an indesribable > heaven-like underlayment that is revealed when akusala cittas finally > cease. I don't see any other alternatives. > > Heaven sounds pretty good but if it is a mere cessation we might want to > consider if that is really what we want. I'm inclined toward the > cessation interpretation, but I haven't decided if that is what I really > want or if there is an alternative other than dukkha. Cease or suffer, > are those the only choices? > > Larry > I agree Larry. Thanks for clarifying it. I think though, that cessation becomes a more "desirable" goal when suffering is seen more clearly. When the reality of the mater is: that there isn't a self, that there is only a delusion that brings more sorrow than happiness, that impermanence is going to wipe out all formations that we are attached to, then escape (cessation) from sorrow and delusion doesn't have a "downside." The Buddha described cessation as "the highest happiness," and also described it in terms of the elimination of greed, hatred, and delusion. I think a slight mystery of what Nibbana really is will always exist in the mind until it is directly experienced. The Buddha's teaching go in the direction of less and less attachment, and in my limited experience, that seems to always lead to a higher level of happiness. It makes sense, then, that the ultimate non-attachment would lead to the highest happiness whatever that happiness may be. TG 18292 From: Date: Sun Dec 29, 2002 10:12am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Anatta - forget the scholars Hi TG, I agree. A life without attachment would be very special indeed, and would be of inestimable benefit to others. And though the Buddha's actions had no kammic consequences for him, they continue to have consequences for us, even today. Larry 18293 From: James Date: Sun Dec 29, 2002 10:50am Subject: NEO of The Matrix (Was:Re: Dhamma Issues...etc.) --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "nidive " > The Buddha is not equivalent to nibbana. The Buddha knows what is > nibbana, but he himself is not nibbana. > > It is not that I perceive the Buddha to be real or possessing a > self. For the Buddha was nothing but merely the five aggregates. At > his death, the five aggregates are extinguished. Extinguished, there > is no more becoming. When there is no more becoming, there is > FINALITY. > > To say that the Buddha is equivalent to nibbana is to refuse to > admit THAT FINALITY. It shows the continued desire for existence > (for eternity). It complicates that which is non-complicated. > > > Regards, > NEO Swee Boon HI NEO, Okay, the Buddha before he was enlightened was like us, right? He was composed of five aggregates, which he clung to. He thought he was real (had a self) and the people around him thought he was real. And he suffered as a consequence. He finally stopped clinging to those aggregates and became enlightened and The Buddha (The Enlightened One). Then he no longer the illusion of 'Siddhartha', he was 'The Buddha'. Nibbana and the Buddha, for all practical purposes, are the same. This is not a complication, it is a liberation. I understand the difficulity it is to understand this because the assumption is that if the Buddha achieved Nibbana, he must have 'known' was Nibbana was. Like if he felt pain, he would 'know' pain. But the Buddha could not 'know' with mental fabrications something that is the absence of mental fabrications. With his mental fabrications, he knew Nibbana as profound calm...but that wasn't really Nibbana. He described the state of Nibbana without mental fabrications as the 'unformed'; which again is a negative description and isn't really a 'graspable characteristic.' If Nibbana was something to `know', not everyone would be able to `know' it. Since Nibbana is a `state', everybody can achieve it. Again, you are making the mistake in thinking that Nibbana is a secret knowledge that we must learn. That is not the case. All of the quotes you give refer to knowing what causes samsara and knowing when those causes cease, not to 'knowing' the state of nibbana. As I showed you with the sutta references, trying to 'know' Nibbana is like trying to 'know' all of the grains of sand on the bank of the Ganges River or all the gallons of water in the ocean. It can't be done. You have yet to disprove this specific statement; you just keep restating a 'self' view of Nibbana. Nibbana isn't really `knowing' anything; it is when the mind is liberated from the three poisons then `self' and `samsara' are seen as illusion. Here is a test: Tell me one thing that you could guarantee that every single person in the world could cognitively `know'. I don't think there is any such one thing. Everyone has such different minds, different perspectives, different backgrounds, etc., that we all see the world in a different way. But, nibbana is the same for everyone and everyone can achieve it. Why? Because it doesn't come from the mind, it comes from the dissolution of the mind's component parts. Nibbana can't be `known', it can only be `achieved'. Metta, James ps. I know that many people write about 'knowing' nibbana, but that is for convenience sake. Nibbana isn't a knowing, it is a negation to becoming. 18294 From: Ray Hendrickson Date: Sun Dec 29, 2002 0:01pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Anatta - forget the scholars ----- Original Message ----- From: To: Sent: Sunday, December 29, 2002 8:43 AM Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Anatta - forget the scholars > Hi Swee Boon, > > Thanks for the sutta references, very appropriate. Thinking about this > further, it occurred to me that cares and concerns about the nature of > nibbana can be seen, even now, as nonabiding and unreliable and > therefore not self. So where does that leave us in regard to pathwise > strategies? Nowhere. It's too late to be deluded. We already don't > exist. > > Larry > > Hi Larry a bit of a side note. Even though the Buddha taught there was no self, he did not teach we do not exist. The answer to this riddle lies in Dependent Origination. From SN XII.48 The Cosmologist, "Staying at Savatthi. Then a brahman cosmologist [1] went to the Blessed One and, on arrival, exchanged courteous greetings with him. After an exchange of friendly greetings & courtesies, he sat to one side. As he was sitting there, he said to the Blessed One, "Now, then, Master Gotama, does everything [2] exist?" "'Everything exists' is the senior form of cosmology, brahman." "Then, Master Gotama, does everything not exist?" "'Everything does not exist' is the second form of cosmology, brahman." "Then is everything a Oneness?" "'Everything is a Oneness' is the third form of cosmology, brahman." "Then is everything a Manyness?" "'Everything is a Manyness' is the fourth form of cosmology, brahman. Avoiding these two extremes, the Tathagata teaches the Dhamma via the middle: From ignorance as a requisite condition come fabrications. From fabrications as a requisite condition comes consciousness. From consciousness as a requisite condition comes name-&-form. From name-&-form as a requisite condition come the six sense media. From the six sense media as a requisite condition comes contact. From contact as a requisite condition comes feeling. From feeling as a requisite condition comes craving. From craving as a requisite condition comes clinging/sustenance. From clinging/sustenance as a requisite condition comes becoming. From becoming as a requisite condition comes birth. From birth as a requisite condition, then aging & death, sorrow, lamentation, pain, distress, & despair come into play. Such is the origination of this entire mass of stress & suffering. " End of quote. For me one of the most influential explanations of this middle way of dependent origination comes from the Visuddhimagga, "...so it has been termed here thus by the Sage who is skilled in phraselolgy that confoorms to its meaning: it has been accurately termed 'dependent origination' is the meaning, and while so termed: The first component will deny the false veiw of eternity And so on, and the second will pervent The nihilistic type of view and others like it, while the two Together show the true way that is meant." The expression of D.O. that helps me the most in meditation and contemplation is what I call the general formation of dependent origination. From MN 113 we read within the Sutta Ananda speaking: "But, vereralbe sir, (the Buddha), in what way can a bhikkhu be called skilled in dependent origination?" " Here, Ananda, a bhikkhu knows thus: 'When this exists, that comes to be; with the arising of this, that arises. When this does not exist, that does not come to be; with the cessation of this, that ceases." This formulation helps me in driving home the teachings of impermeance and non-self.... Ray 18295 From: Andrew Date: Sun Dec 29, 2002 3:14pm Subject: Re: Keeping Sila --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "christine_forsyth " wrote: > It is not a matter > of what a person happens to like or dislike (emotivism), or of what > his or her society happens to approve or disapprove of (cultural > relativism). (Keown, 1992: 64, 231-2). > Christine, I don't know if this is true or not, but I read that in pre-European contact times, some Pacific Islander communities permitted husbands and wives to sleep with whomever. It was culturally acceptable and, as such, did not cause fights or the raising of eyebrows. In the context of that culture, would this be "sexual misconduct"? Do we stick with the culture the Buddha was born into and, for example, say that it is sexual misconduct to have relations with a female convict? Or do we re-interpret these sutta words, as Bhikkhu Bodhi does, to say that "female convicts" means "those prohibited as partners by the law of the land"? If there is no degree of cultural relativism at all, do we not risk becoming dogmatic and rule-driven? [I don't know the answers, by the way, and am hoping you have some clues]. By the way, you'll be pleased to learn that Smokey Joe is on a feline diet!! Andrew 18296 From: Andrew Date: Sun Dec 29, 2002 3:22pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Right livelihood (was, Tinker, Tailor ...) --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Jonothan Abbott wrote: > Andrew > > You asked: > "Can you in reality be a slaughterman and practice right livelihood?" > > Like sila, right livelihood is a moment of abstention from > 'wrongness'. So if a slaughterman abstains from wrong speech in the > course of his livelihood, the wholesome mental state would be the one > that is called 'right livelihood'. > > It may be more helpful to think in terms of (momentary) abstention > from wrong livelihood than 'being in a right-livelihood or > wrong-livelihood occupation' or 'practising right livelihood'. > > Jon > Thanks Jon I think I understand that from previous posts. But does that not reduce right livelihood to a synonym for right thought/speech/action? Why did the Buddha talk about right livelihood and usury and soothsaying etc? What does it add to the teachings on right thought/speech/action? Andrew 18297 From: Date: Sun Dec 29, 2002 4:07pm Subject: Way 31, Comm, Synopsis "The Way of Mindfulness" by Soma Thera The Section of the Synopsis p.42 http://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/bps/misc/wayof.html If, in the meditator's body, called the world, covetousness and grief are abandoned, in the worlds of his feelings and so forth too, these are abandoned owing to the earlier abandoning of these by the yogi [kamañcettha kayasankhate loke abhijjha domanassam pahinam vedanadi lokesu pi tam pahinameva pubbe pahinatta]. Still, everywhere, the abandoning of the defilements has been stated by way of the different types of persons and by way of the diversity of the thought-unit, in which the development of the different subjects of the Arousing of Mindfulness takes place [nana puggalavasena pana nana cittakkhana satipatthana bhavanavasena ca sabbattha vuttam]. Or it should be understood thus: It is stated in this manner in order to indicate that the abandoning of the defilements in one object implies the abandoning of the defilements in the remaining objects. [Tika] Therefore, it is not fit to speak again of the abandoning of these; for while the defilements are abandoned, they are not abandoned separately in one object after another, -- i.e., the defilements pertaining to the body, for instance, are not first abandoned and then those belonging to the feeling and so forth, in succession, but the defilements of all objects are abandoned when the defilements are abandoned in one object. [T] That is due to the fact that only the defilements which can arise in the future are capable of being abandoned through the scorching out of the causes by the attainment of the Path or through measures that make the causes temporarily impotent, because of the observance of virtue and the development of absorption. Past defilements and those arising in the present are beyond the scope of abandoning. [T] The abandoning of the defilements of one object in the thought-unit of the Path is indeed the abandoning of the defilements of all objects. [T] It is right to say that by the Path, are the defilements abandoned. [T] The abandoning of the defilements of one person is not necessarily the abandonding of the defilements of another person [nahi ekassa pahinam tato aññassa pahinam nama hoti]. Reference to the different types of persons is made to point this fact of possible difference of method by way of object. [T] "The diversity of the thought-unit." The mundane thought-unit is meant, as the preliminary path is dealt with here. [T] What is abandoned temporarily by mundane meditation in the body, is not suppressed in the feelings and the other objects. [T] Even if covetousness and grief should not occur in the feelings and the other objects, when it is suppressed in the body, it should not be stated that owing to efficient rejection by meditation opposed to covetousness and grief, there is no covetousness and grief in the other objects such as feelings and in the case of suppression by meditation, therefore, it is fit to speak of the rejection of covetousness and grief again in feelings and the other objects. [T] The defilements abandoned in one object are abandoned in the remaining objects too [ekattha pahinam sesesu pi pahinam hoti]. This statement refers to the supramundane meditation of Mindfulness-arousing. In the case of mundane meditation the rejection is stated everywhere with reference to bare non-occurrence of the defilements [lokiya bhavanaya sabbattha appavatt mattam sandhaya vuttam]. [T] In regard to the four objects of contemplation through the Arousing of Mindfulness, it is said in the Vibhanga thus: Even the Five Aggregates are the world [pañca pi khandha lokoti hi Vibhange catusu pi thanesu vuttanti]. 18298 From: Date: Sun Dec 29, 2002 4:22pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Anatta - forget the scholars Hi Ray, Thanks for the notes on dependent arising. It's always worthwhile contemplating this. What I meant by "we already don't exist" is that no person exists and nothing of any lasting significance arises when cares and concerns arise and this is not a state that we may or may not aspire to enter. It is already the case. best wishes, Larry 18299 From: James Date: Sun Dec 29, 2002 4:55pm Subject: Re: Anatta - forget the scholars --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Ray Hendrickson" > Hi Larry a bit of a side note. Even though the Buddha taught there was > no self, he did not teach we do not exist. The answer to this riddle lies > in Dependent Origination. Hi Ray, I am not sure if I completely agree with you. Of course it depends on how one defines `exist'. We exist and yet do not exist. We exist, and samsara exists, very much like a fire exists. When ignorance is present, it fuels our existence just as fire is fueled by wood. Does fire exist? Yes, but it only exists as a condition of certain factors. Fire can't be put in a bottle and doesn't have a material existence other than energy. When the fuel is taken away, the fire goes away. Where does it go? Well, it doesn't go anywhere; it's just that the conditions that created it have been removed. So it didn't really exist on its own. We are under the illusion that we exist on our own and independent of causes. We are ignorant of our true existence, which is transitory and non-self. By the most common definition of the term `exist: To have actual being; be real' I would say that we don't exist. We are under the illusion of existing as a separate and independent being. However, the Buddha, who had removed the source for his existence, REALLY didn't exist anymore. He didn't exist in his mind or in actuality. He had `gone out'. Here are some sutta quotes to support this explanation of mine: ""And so, Anuradha -- when you can't pin down the Tathagata as a truth or reality even in the present life -- is it proper for you to declare, 'Friends, the Tathagata -- the supreme man, the superlative man, attainer of the superlative attainment -- being described, is described otherwise than with these four positions: The Tathagata exists after death, does not exist after death, both does & does not exist after death, neither exists nor does not exist after death'?" "No, lord." "Very good, Anuradha. Very good. Both formerly & now, it is only stress that I describe, and the cessation of stress." http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/samyutta/sn22-086.html "Of course you're befuddled, Vaccha. Of course you're confused. Deep, Vaccha, is this phenomenon, hard to see, hard to realize, tranquil, refined, beyond the scope of conjecture, subtle, to-be-experienced by the wise. For those with other views, other practices, other satisfactions, other aims, other teachers, it is difficult to know. That being the case, I will now put some questions to you. Answer as you see fit. How do you construe this, Vaccha: If a fire were burning in front of you, would you know that, 'This fire is burning in front of me'?" "...yes..." "And suppose someone were to ask you, Vaccha, 'This fire burning in front of you, dependent on what is it burning?' Thus asked, how would you reply?" "...I would reply, 'This fire burning in front of me is burning dependent on grass & timber as its sustenance.'" "If the fire burning in front of you were to go out, would you know that, 'This fire burning in front of me has gone out'?" "...yes..." "And suppose someone were to ask you, 'This fire that has gone out in front of you, in which direction from here has it gone? East? West? North? Or south?' Thus asked, how would you reply?" "That doesn't apply, Master Gotama. Any fire burning dependent on a sustenance of grass and timber, being unnourished -- from having consumed that sustenance and not being offered any other -- is classified simply as 'out' (unbound)." "Even so, Vaccha, any physical form by which one describing the Tathagata would describe him: That the Tathagata has abandoned, its root destroyed, like an uprooted palm tree, deprived of the conditions of existence, not destined for future arising. Freed from the classification of form, Vaccha, the Tathagata is deep, boundless, hard to fathom, like the sea. 'Reappears' doesn't apply. 'Does not reappear' doesn't apply. 'Both does & does not reappear' doesn't apply. 'Neither reappears nor does not reappear' doesn't apply. "Any feeling... Any perception... Any mental fabrication... "Any consciousness by which one describing the Tathagata would describe him: That the Tathagata has abandoned, its root destroyed, like an uprooted palm tree, deprived of the conditions of existence, not destined for future arising. Freed from the classification of consciousness, Vaccha, the Tathagata is deep, boundless, hard to fathom, like the sea. 'Reappears' doesn't apply. 'Does not reappear' doesn't apply. 'Both does & does not reappear' doesn't apply. 'Neither reappears nor does not reappear' doesn't apply." http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/majjhima/mn072.html Metta, James 18300 From: James Date: Sun Dec 29, 2002 5:26pm Subject: NEO of The Matrix (Was:Re: Dhamma Issues...etc.) HI NEO, I wanted to give you one more sutta reference where the Buddha states, unequivocally, that Nibbana is impossible to describe or cognitively 'know': Upasiva: One free from passion for all sensual pleasures relying on nothingness, letting go of all else, released in the highest emancipation of perception: Does he stay there unaffected? The Buddha: One free from passion for all sensual pleasures relying on nothingness, letting go of all else, released in the highest emancipation of perception: He stays there unaffected. Upasiva: If he stays there, O All-around Eye, unaffected for many years, right there would he be cooled & released? Would his consciousness be like that? The Buddha: As a flame overthrown by the force of the wind goes to an end that cannot be classified,[2] so the sage free from naming activity goes to an end that cannot be classified. Upasiva: He who has reached the end: Does he not exist, or is he for eternity free from dis-ease? Please, sage, declare this to me as this phenomenon has been known by you. The Buddha: One who has reached the end has no criterion [3] by which anyone would say that -- for him it doesn't exist. When all phenomena are done away with,[4] all means of speaking are done away with as well. http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/khuddaka/suttanipata/snp5-06.html Please pay particular attention to this last response from the Buddha. So you see, the Buddha did say that Nibbana was impossible to describe. Did the Buddha `know' Nibbana? Nibbana is, as he states, something that `cannot be classified'. In other words, it cannot be known with cognitive thought. Metta, James 18301 From: Ray Hendrickson Date: Sun Dec 29, 2002 6:04pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Anatta - forget the scholars ----- Original Message ----- From: To: Sent: Sunday, December 29, 2002 4:55 PM Subject: [dsg] Re: Anatta - forget the scholars > --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Ray Hendrickson" > > > Hi Larry a bit of a side note. Even though the Buddha taught > there was > > no self, he did not teach we do not exist. The answer to this > riddle lies > > in Dependent Origination. > > Hi Ray, > > I am not sure if I completely agree with you. Of course it depends > on how one defines `exist'. We exist and yet do not exist. We > exist, and samsara exists, very much like a fire exists. When > ignorance is present, it fuels our existence just as fire is fueled > by wood. Does fire exist? Yes, but it only exists as a condition of > certain factors. Fire can't be put in a bottle and doesn't have a > material existence other than energy. When the fuel is taken away, > the fire goes away. Where does it go? Well, it doesn't go anywhere; > it's just that the conditions that created it have been removed. So > it didn't really exist on its own. Hi James, Yes I agree with what you are saying here. > > We are under the illusion that we exist on our own and independent of > causes. We are ignorant of our true existence, which is transitory > and non-self. By the most common definition of the term `exist: To > have actual being; be real' I would say that we don't exist. We are > under the illusion of existing as a separate and independent being. It seems here you are saying that because the Buddha taught that the self does not exist he also taught nothing exists? I think this notion of a common definition of existence is covered under the teachings of non-self, rather than teaching on existence or non-existence. > However, the Buddha, who had removed the source for his existence, > REALLY didn't exist anymore. He didn't exist in his mind or in > actuality. He had `gone out'. In terms of the Buddha's parinibbana I think the Suttas you quote seem to be saying that the terms exist or does not exist does not apply. I dont see how they support the position that the Buddha REALLY didn't exist anymore? Then again, it will not be the first time I missed something LOL......Ray (PS I am leaving the Suttas you quoted in this message as a reference) > > Here are some sutta quotes to support this explanation of mine: > > ""And so, Anuradha -- when you can't pin down the Tathagata as a > truth or reality even in the present life -- is it proper for you to > declare, 'Friends, the Tathagata -- the supreme man, the superlative > man, attainer of the superlative attainment -- being described, is > described otherwise than with these four positions: The Tathagata > exists after death, does not exist after death, both does & does not > exist after death, neither exists nor does not exist after death'?" > > "No, lord." > > "Very good, Anuradha. Very good. Both formerly & now, it is only > stress that I describe, and the cessation of stress." > http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/samyutta/sn22-086.html > > > "Of course you're befuddled, Vaccha. Of course you're confused. Deep, > Vaccha, is this phenomenon, hard to see, hard to realize, tranquil, > refined, beyond the scope of conjecture, subtle, to-be-experienced by > the wise. For those with other views, other practices, other > satisfactions, other aims, other teachers, it is difficult to know. > > That being the case, I will now put some questions to you. Answer as > you see fit. How do you construe this, Vaccha: If a fire were burning > in front of you, would you know that, 'This fire is burning in front > of me'?" > > "...yes..." > > "And suppose someone were to ask you, Vaccha, 'This fire burning in > front of you, dependent on what is it burning?' Thus asked, how would > you reply?" > > "...I would reply, 'This fire burning in front of me is burning > dependent on grass & timber as its sustenance.'" > > "If the fire burning in front of you were to go out, would you know > that, 'This fire burning in front of me has gone out'?" > "...yes..." > > "And suppose someone were to ask you, 'This fire that has gone out in > front of you, in which direction from here has it gone? East? West? > North? Or south?' Thus asked, how would you reply?" > > "That doesn't apply, Master Gotama. Any fire burning dependent on a > sustenance of grass and timber, being unnourished -- from having > consumed that sustenance and not being offered any other -- is > classified simply as 'out' (unbound)." > > "Even so, Vaccha, any physical form by which one describing the > Tathagata would describe him: That the Tathagata has abandoned, its > root destroyed, like an uprooted palm tree, deprived of the > conditions of existence, not destined for future arising. Freed from > the classification of form, Vaccha, the Tathagata is deep, boundless, > hard to fathom, like the sea. 'Reappears' doesn't apply. 'Does not > reappear' doesn't apply. 'Both does & does not reappear' doesn't > apply. 'Neither reappears nor does not reappear' doesn't apply. > "Any feeling... Any perception... Any mental fabrication... > > "Any consciousness by which one describing the Tathagata would > describe him: That the Tathagata has abandoned, its root destroyed, > like an uprooted palm tree, deprived of the conditions of existence, > not destined for future arising. Freed from the classification of > consciousness, Vaccha, the Tathagata is deep, boundless, hard to > fathom, like the sea. 'Reappears' doesn't apply. 'Does not reappear' > doesn't apply. 'Both does & does not reappear' doesn't > apply. 'Neither reappears nor does not reappear' doesn't apply." > http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/majjhima/mn072.html > > Metta, James > 18302 From: James Date: Sun Dec 29, 2002 6:20pm Subject: [dsg] Re: Anatta - forget the scholars --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Ray Hendrickson" wrote: > > Hi James, > It seems here you are saying that because the Buddha taught that the > self does not exist he also taught nothing exists? Hi Ray, He did not teach this specifically, because it is outside of the realm of dukkha and the cause of dukkha, but he might have taught this unintentionally. I am currently, when I have time, researching the illusionary nature of 'self' and 'samsara'. I am also looking at their cause, 'ignorance'. Since 'the self' is illusion, it only stands to reason that samsara is illusion as well; or does it? If it is illusion, what causes it? Are we all to blame? Are we illusionary entities semi-existing in an illusionary world of our own making? Interesting questions. Though this may seem the realm of Mahayana Buddhism it really isn't. I will post when I have completed my research and have 'all my ducks in a row'. :-) Metta, James 18303 From: Kom Tukovinit Date: Sun Dec 29, 2002 9:58pm Subject: RE: [dsg] Re: Anatta - View of some scholars Dear Larry, I have looked at the two notes that you posted, as well as the specific section in the sutta in question. Here's my opinion (watch out!): In the first note, I think B. Bodhi offers (unknown if it was his opinion) an explanation of what Dhamma here means, and the explanation includes nibbana as part of dhamma. However, he is also saying that the commentaries do not explicitly offer this explanation, and he is disclaiming that the explanation is part of the commentaries. He (unfortunately for us) doesn't point out other places that might support or disprove this explanation. In the commentaries (Thai version) of this sutta, the commentaries simply point out that the Buddha didn't say "sankhara" in the last set, but said "dhamma" to include concepts that are objects of jhana meditation. The commentary does not exclude nibbana from this set, although it neither explicitly includes it. However, it is common that the commentaries (sometimes) do not explain what has already been explained earlier (either in DN or earlier MN), or is already well understood. In MN 1.26, Mulapariyaya sutta, the Buddha was explaining how the unlearned worldlings perceives dhammas differently from learned worldlings (successively all the way to the Buddha himself). From the sutta: He perceives Nibbana as Nibbana. Having perceived Nibbana as Nibbana, he conceives [himself as] Nibbana, he conceives [himself] in Nibbana, he conceives [himself apart] from Nibbana, he conceives Nibbana to be 'mine,' he delights in Nibbana. Why is that? because he has not fully understood it, I say. If you come from my point of view, where I have learned that the (real) Nibbana cannot possibly be object as self, nor the object of attachment. This short statement about Nibbana (by the Buddha) would be indeed very puzzling. The commentaries clear this up by saying that the word Nibbana here only refers to the common (wrong) views of that time about what Nibbana was (as sensory delights, or the absorption of the 4 jhanas): the commentaries implicitly excludes the real Nibbana from what is called Nibbana in this section. There is no need to explain anything about the real nibbana at this point because what is referred to is not about nibbana. I don't think the Commentators were avoiding the issue about Nibbana being anatta in this passage. Larry, I am very delighted with dhamma friends who are very detailed with their studies (like you are), because I think it is a resolve to study the truth/or what is said (and I learn much from such a person). However, I don't think you could form a supportable opinion on this issue based on just these two suttas. K. Sujin encourages us not to rush to a conclusion based on just few fragments from the tipitaka, but we should do our best to get points from other parts of the tipitaka too (which I cannot offer at this point). As for the opinion of the scholars, I don't think it is as important as the truths. But since we cannot possibly know the truths (nibbana) right now, perhaps it is best to carefully study many tipitaka references (and the commentaries) on this issue and form a picture in our mind about what the tipitaka/commentaries really say (instead of relying on other people's opinion). kom 18304 From: Sarah Date: Mon Dec 30, 2002 1:08am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Keeping Sila Hi Andrew (& Christine later), It seems a long time since we’ve chatted. I’m really appreciating the break in your studies and the chance to listen in on your chats with Chris and others. --- "Andrew " > If there is no degree of cultural relativism at all, do we not risk > becoming dogmatic and rule-driven? ..... I think this would very much be the popular view - i.e the Vinaya rules for bhikkhus and bhikkhunis, precepts, moral guidelines and other aspects of the Buddha’s teachings are out of date, culturally bound, dogmatic and to be picked at according to convenience;-)I also appreciate your comments to Ken H in which you point out that whilst “working on” realising the ‘relevance of nama-rupa’, ‘we may need some mundane prompting to look at what we do and its consequences for others’. You mention other culturally accepted norms. I think the confidence in sila and other wholesome qualities will always go against the stream and like Chris, I’m sceptical about ‘cultural relativism with respect to the precepts’. I think her quote from Peter Harvey made a good point: “It is not a matter of what a person happens to like or dislike (emotivism), or of what his or her society happens to approve or disapprove of (cultural relativism).” ***** It may appear that the alternatives cause no harm and that everyone is happy but it is seldom so simple. When we first arrived in Hong Kong, it was still the norm amongst many from China to have concubines and some of my students had more than one mother as a result, which always seemed to cause complications. It was also the norm for the other expatriate lawyers from Jonothan’s division to go off to Manila for the weekend for fun without their wives. Being ‘one of the boys’ was almost a prerequisite for promotional advancement. Jon was considered pretty odd at that time because he didn’t drink or party and was scrupulously honest in his Prosecution work. In the interview for his job, his Australian boss asked him if it was true, as rumoured, that he liked to lie on a bed of nails to meditate;-). Everyone seemed cheerful about the ‘norms’, but life is never so simple. Many young families came unstuck in the process. Most his colleagues and bosses are Chinese these days and his values and lifetsyle are now well-respected by others too;-) The more confidence one has in the value of sila and of all wholesome states, the easier it is to abstain from wrong speech, action and livelihood, no matter what the peer pressure or rewards may be. However, I think we also start off ‘where we are’. If one’s livelihood is working in a slaughterhouse, as one sees the harm in killing, gradually there will be fewer and fewer conditions for these acts. A sotapanna cannot break the precepts under any conditions, but until that time, the development is gradual. Someone may know that working in a slaughterhouse would lead to wrong livelihood but would swat flies or mosquitoes in the kitchen at home, exaggerate expenses claims on tax forms or use office equipment or wrong speech at work for personal gain without compunction. I think we all have many opportunities in a day to follow good sila or the reverse. I feel very fortunate and blessed to live with somone who has the highest integrity and who sets an example for me by seeing the harm in the slightest deviation from what is ‘right’ no matter what the circumstances or cultural norms. It’s very easy to be casual or careless about one’s actions and the consequences. I really appreciate the Abhisanda sutta Christine quoted from in this regard about the five gifts (precepts) “that are not open to suspicion, will never be open to suspicion, and are unfaulted by knowledgable contemplatives & priests....” These gifts “original, long-standing, traditional, ancient, unadulterated, unadulterated from the beginning” cannot be underestimated as I see it. ***** Christine, you ask about the value of sila, the Abhidhamma perspective and living “in this world”. I don’t see any conflict or distinction. Wholesome states including right speech, action and livelihood will only develop with the keen understanding that clearly knows the difference between moments of ‘right’ and ‘wrong’. As Andrew quoted B.Bodhi as saying: “Thus for the moral training to become a proper part of the path, it has to be taken up under the tutelage of the first two factors, right view and right intention.....” Clearly understanding dhammas as conditioned and not-self is not an excuse or justification for any unwholesome action. Clearly this would be wrong view. On the contrary, panna clearly knows what needs to be developed, what is harmful and prompts the samvegga (sense of urgency) to develop that which is beneficial to all. I really like your other quote from the Cetana Sutta as well: “Skillful virtues have freedom from remorse as their purpose, freedom from remorse as their reward. In this way, mental qualities lead on to mental qualities, mental qualities bring mental qualities to their consummation, for the sake of going from the near to the Further Shore.” ***** Thank you also for your helpful New Year’s list of cankers/clingings etc. We can see from the many classifications that the same defilements are explained and categorised in different ways to help people understand the dangers of them. I think the more they are understood as impermanent dhammas which are anatta, the less depressing they seem. ***** I look forward to further discussion from you both and others too. I commiserate with Smokey Joe on his feline diet, Andrew;-( A good example of how kind acts are not always appreciated;-) Sarah ======= 18305 From: Sarah Date: Mon Dec 30, 2002 1:18am Subject: Re: [dsg] New Member Hi Norm, Let me join Christine in welcoming you here and also to thank you for introducing yourself;-) --- "vehapphala " wrote: > > > 1. Hello. My first post. If any in error please advise and delete. > > 2. Live in USA, retired, and travel as much as possible. Plan to > reside > in Thailand. .... No errors at all - very glad to hear from you. Sounds like you have some interesting retirement plans. Keep us updated with your travels to Asia! It sounds like you have some Thai and Pali knowledge - look forward to hearing more. There are quite a few Thais here as well. > 5. FWIW, I picked "vehapphala" as I may never attain this level much > less nibbana. Perhaps, I should use, "puthujjana?" .... Thanks for being prompted to come in with the other helpful info for Beth & Howard. It's always better to have 'higher states' as reminders and as an encouragement, perhaps;-) Look f/w to more..let us know if you have any questions or problems making yourself at home here.... Sarah ===== 18306 From: Sarah Date: Mon Dec 30, 2002 1:30am Subject: Re: [dsg] NEO of The Matrix (Was:Re: Dhamma Issues...etc.) Hi James & Swee Boon, Appreciating your discussions very much. Look forward to many more;-) I thought this post of Swee Boon's was particularly helpful: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/messages/18278 --- "nidive " wrote: > Hi James, > Nibbana cannot be learnt. Nibbana has to be KNOWN. > > > > Nibbana isn't 'knowing' anything specific, it is releasing the > > mind from the very thing that formed it. > > Nibbana has to be KNOWN. But nibbana itself is not equivalent > to 'knowing' anything. The following suttas clearly shows that > nibbana has to be KNOWN. > > -------------------------------------------------------- > "I will teach you the penetrative explanation that is a Dhamma > explanation. Listen & pay close attention. I will speak." > > "As you say, lord," the monks responded. > > The Blessed One said: "And which penetrative explanation is a Dhamma > explanation? > > "Sensuality should be known. The cause by which sensuality comes > into play should be known. The diversity in sensuality should be > known. The result of sensuality should be known. The cessation of > sensuality should be known. The path of practice for the cessation > of sensuality should be known. ================================ 18307 From: christine_forsyth Date: Mon Dec 30, 2002 2:31am Subject: Re: Keeping Sila Hi Andrew, You say: "If there is no degree of cultural relativism at all, do we not risk becoming dogmatic and rule-driven?" C: Thinking this over, I think that my answer is 'yes, possibly, but not necessarily'. Does having a firm base in the five precepts have to mean dogmatism? The problem as I see it is that customs of a country are usually formulated by the most powerful group acting in ways that are most beneficial and convenient to them. Mostly, throughout history this group has consisted of high status adult males. There is a trickle down effect to less powerful groups of males. Females and small children were simply seen as chattels - moveable property, and their wishes were rarely considered. I think this process still occurs today - the groupings may change a lttle, the tools are different (the media as opposed to the pulpit) but the most powerful still heavily influence and benefit from the customs of a country. What degree of flexibility should there be in the meaning of the Precepts? And who decides? For instance, with regard to the first Precept - not to take the life of any sentient being, would cultural relativism mean this should not apply to Buddhists where one of the customs of the country is that people participate in blood sports and pastimes like hunting animals and birds with powerful rifles or bows and arrows, fishing, or bull fighting etc.? With regard to the fifth Precept - to abstain from drugs and intoxicants, should this not apply to Buddhists in Western countries where their use is clearly a popular custom of the country for a majority of people? Slippery slope don't you think? What was the original purpose of the Precepts? From the suttas already mentioned, they originated as advice on the course of conduct most favourable to the production of good Kamma. So, I'm still leaning towards thinking the Precepts should be viewed from a universal point of view as opposed to what is dictated by time, place, customs, circumstances, and personal interpretation. My sympathies to Smokey Joe - Tell him the one about 'a moment on the lips, a lifetime on the hips'. :-) metta, Christine --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Andrew " wrote: > --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "christine_forsyth > " wrote: > > It is not a matter > > of what a person happens to like or dislike (emotivism), or of what > > his or her society happens to approve or disapprove of (cultural > > relativism). (Keown, 1992: 64, 231-2). > > > > Christine, I don't know if this is true or not, but I read that in > pre-European contact times, some Pacific Islander communities > permitted husbands and wives to sleep with whomever. It was > culturally acceptable and, as such, did not cause fights or the > raising of eyebrows. In the context of that culture, would this be > "sexual misconduct"? > Do we stick with the culture the Buddha was born into and, for > example, say that it is sexual misconduct to have relations with a > female convict? Or do we re-interpret these sutta words, as Bhikkhu > Bodhi does, to say that "female convicts" means "those prohibited as > partners by the law of the land"? > If there is no degree of cultural relativism at all, do we not risk > becoming dogmatic and rule-driven? > [I don't know the answers, by the way, and am hoping you have some clues]. > By the way, you'll be pleased to learn that Smokey Joe is on a feline > diet!! > Andrew 18308 From: christine_forsyth Date: Mon Dec 30, 2002 3:05am Subject: Re: [dsg] Prophetic tradition within Buddhism Hi Ram, Thanks for this information - I found it very interesting. Does the fact that people can see the future, mean it is already settled? Wouldn't this mean there is no point in making any effort to listen to and follow the Dhamma - what difference would it make if the future already exists? metta, Christine --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Ramindu Weeratna" wrote: > Sorry for the late reply Christine, > > Being able to see the future is not only done by Buddhas, I hear it was done by yogis in ancient times. > Do u know of the teacher of king suddodana - Asita KalaDevala. he was a brakmana(non Buddhist) who had the Anagatassa gnana(the ability of seeing the future) That's why he smiled & cried at the birth of Siddhartha. he saw that siddartha will attain Buddha hood. But he saw that he'll not be living to see it. > > Buddhas can see the past as far as it gets & Buddhas can see the future Its not prediction. I've heard that in Thripitaka there's a place where Lord Buddha had mentioned of great personalities who came after his passing away, like king Ashoka,etc (any one know where exactly it is ?) > > Don't take this as a all seeing & all hearing as with god. I'v heard that, Only & only when he wishes to see some thing, he uses the wisdom which is used to do it & it is reviled to him. > > Hope This Helps > May u be well & happy > With Metta > Ram 18309 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Mon Dec 30, 2002 6:03am Subject: Re: [dsg] Right livelihood (was, Tinker, Tailor ...) Andrew --- "Andrew " wrote: ... > Thanks Jon > I think I understand that from previous posts. But does that not > reduce right livelihood to a synonym for right > thought/speech/action? No, not a synonym at all. Considered at the level of fundamental phenomena (paramattha dhamma), the abstention that is Right Livelihood is a different metal factor from the abstention that is Right Speech or Right Action, which means I suppose that it is abstention of a different kind. Each Eightfold Path moment (supramundane path consciousness) is accompanied by Right Livelihood as well as by Right Speech and Right Action. > Why did the Buddha talk about right livelihood and usury and > soothsaying etc? I suppose because, considered at the conventional level, certain livelihoods necessarily involve repeated instances of wrong livelihood and are to be avoided if possible. Jon 18310 From: James Date: Mon Dec 30, 2002 6:32am Subject: [dsg] NEO of The Matrix (Was:Re: Dhamma Issues...etc.) --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Sarah wrote: > Hi James & Swee Boon, > > Appreciating your discussions very much. Look forward to many more;-) > > I thought this post of Swee Boon's was particularly helpful: > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/messages/18278 > > --- "nidive " wrote: > Hi James, > > Nibbana cannot be learnt. Nibbana has to be KNOWN. > > > > > > > Nibbana isn't 'knowing' anything specific, it is releasing the > > > mind from the very thing that formed it. > > > > Nibbana has to be KNOWN. But nibbana itself is not equivalent > > to 'knowing' anything. The following suttas clearly shows that > > nibbana has to be KNOWN. > > > > -------------------------------------------------------- > > "I will teach you the penetrative explanation that is a Dhamma > > explanation. Listen & pay close attention. I will speak." > > > > "As you say, lord," the monks responded. > > > > The Blessed One said: "And which penetrative explanation is a Dhamma > > explanation? > > > > "Sensuality should be known. The cause by which sensuality comes > > into play should be known. The diversity in sensuality should be > > known. The result of sensuality should be known. The cessation of > > sensuality should be known. The path of practice for the cessation > > of sensuality should be known. > > ================================ Hi Sarah, I am glad that you are enjoying the posts. It is a fascinating subject and I plan to write more a bit later. However, I am not sure why you find this post by NEO helpful. Would you be willing to explain? I find the conclusion about Nibbana that he draws from this sutta to be incorrect. Metta, James 18311 From: nidive Date: Mon Dec 30, 2002 7:31am Subject: NEO of The Matrix (Was:Re: Dhamma Issues...etc.) Hi James, > I wanted to give you one more sutta reference where the Buddha > states, unequivocally, that Nibbana is impossible to describe or > cognitively 'know': Thank you for finding that sutta. I have found another sutta where the Buddha explained that nibbana cannot be described even more clearly. "Monks, I will teach you the All. Listen & pay close attention. I will speak." "As you say, lord," the monks responded. The Blessed One said, "What is the All? Simply the eye & forms, ear & sounds, nose & aromas, tongue & flavors, body & tactile sensations, intellect & ideas. This, monks, is called the All. [1] Anyone who would say, 'Repudiating this All, I will describe another,' if questioned on what exactly might be the grounds for his statement, would be unable to explain, and furthermore, would be put to grief. Why? Because it lies beyond range." http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/samyutta/sn35-023.html I am convinced now that nibbana cannot be described or articulated in any language. Because languages are of the All. Nibbana lies beyond range of the All. Therefore, no speech can describe it adequately. But I am still not convinced that nibbana cannot be KNOWN. Ananda: In what way, venerable sir, might a monk attain concentration of such a form that he would have neither the perception of earth with regard to earth, nor of water with regard to water, nor of fire... wind... the dimension of the infinitude of space... the dimension of the infinitude of consciousness... the dimension of nothingness... the dimension of neither perception nor non-perception... this world... nor of the next world with regard to the next world, and yet he would still be percipient? The Buddha: There is the case, Ananda, where he would be percipient of this: 'This is peace, this is exquisite -- the resolution of all mental processes; the relinquishment of all acquisitions; the ending of craving; dispassion; stopping; nibbana.' -- A X.6 [Ananda puts the same question to Sariputta, who responds that he himself once had experienced such a concentration.] Ananda: But what were you percipient of at that time? Sariputta: 'The stopping of becoming -- nibbana -- the stopping of becoming -- nibbana': One perception arose in me as another perception stopped. Just as in a blazing woodchip fire, one flame arises as another flame disappears, even so, 'The stopping of becoming -- nibbana -- the stopping of becoming -- nibbana': One perception arose in me as another one stopped. I was percipient of the stopping of becoming -- nibbana. -- A X.7 http://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/modern/thanissaro/likefire/2- 1.html These suttas clearly show that the Buddha and Venerable Sariputta KNEW nibbana. Yet this perception of nibbana is not a 'state' that is attained upon the death of an arahant. This perception of nibbana is separate from nibbana itself. This perception of nibbana is impermanent, for perception is one of the five aggregates. Nibbana is therefore neither a 'state' nor the highest jhanic 'state' like what you described in Message 18259. Nibbana is simply cessation. There is nothing beyond. Regards, NEO Swee Boon 18312 From: James Date: Mon Dec 30, 2002 7:51am Subject: Re: Keeping Sila --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "christine_forsyth " wrote: > Hi Andrew, > > You say: "If there is no degree of cultural relativism at all, do we > not risk > becoming dogmatic and rule-driven?" > > C: Thinking this over, I think that my answer is 'yes, possibly, but > not necessarily'. Does having a firm base in the five precepts have > to mean dogmatism? Hi Christine, Sarah, and Andrew, I was meaning to jump into this conversation because it is so fascinating. It seems that the conversation is starting to get away from Christine's original, and profound, question: Is there one set of sila for ordinary folk and one set for those who have begun the path to arahantship/buddhahood? This is one area where I believe the teachings of the Buddha are in direct conflict with the teachings of the Abhidhamma (Sarah doesn't seem to think so, but I do). From what I am reading about the Abhidhamma, which is commentary granted, it stresses that wholesome states of mind and unwholesome states of mind are equal fodder for mindfulness and that they both should be viewed equally until they are both abandoned through insight. That to force wholesome states of mind, keep sila no matter what, is sila as silabbatupadana (wrong practice which is clinging to certain rules (rites and rituals) in one's practice). In other words, following sila with the belief that it is `I' who follows sila doesn't detach one from the false view of self and will result in further births, especially in heaven realms. However, the Buddha taught that sila should be practiced no matter what, even if it does result in rebirth in heaven realms. Why did the Buddha stress this? The Abhidhamma seems to me to be advocating a `short-cut' to arahantship, which may not be a short cut at all really. What will happen if one views unwholesome mental states and wholesome mental states as being `non-self' and therefore equal and unchangeable? Well, if insight is developed fully, they will achieve Sukha- vipassako: (those who have gained "dry" release through the power of insight, having developed the bare minimum of concentration before attaining the knowledge that does away with mental effluents (asavakkhaya-ñana) and gaining release. They have no other powers or skills). However, if insight is not developed fully enough, because the base of concentration and tranquility isn't present, such practice could result in sa-upadi-sesa nibbana (arahatship with the khandhas or groups of existing remaining, thus non final nibbana at death of arahat). And in that case, the arahant would still reappear in a heaven realm to dissolve the remaining khandhas. So you see, rebirth in a heaven realm may be a requirement before the attaining of full nibbana can be reached. As the Buddha said, sila should be practiced even if `one has tears on his face' from the difficulty of doing it. Cultural relativism is a non-issue. The precepts should be practiced as stated, no ifs- ands-or-buts about it. Why? Because following the precepts allows for tranquility, tranquility allows for concentration, concentration allows for full release and the ability to be a role model/teacher to others. Take care. Be good, even if it hurts! ;-) Metta, James 18313 From: nidive Date: Mon Dec 30, 2002 8:08am Subject: Re: Keeping Sila Hi James, > However, if insight is not developed fully enough, because > the base of concentration and tranquility isn't present, such > practice could result in sa-upadi-sesa nibbana (arahatship with > the khandhas or groups of existing remaining, thus non final > nibbana at death of arahat). > And in that case, the arahant would still reappear in a heaven > realm to dissolve the remaining khandhas. So you see, rebirth > in a heaven realm may be a requirement before the attaining of > full nibbana can be reached. It is to my understanding that sa-upadi-sesa nibbana (nibbana with fuel remaining) means that the arahant has not died yet (the five aggregates are not extinguished yet). Monks, there are these two forms of the nibbana property. Which two? The nibbana property with fuel remaining, and the nibbana property with no fuel remaining. And what is the nibbana property with fuel remaining? There is the case where a monk is a worthy one devoid of mental effluents, who has attained completion, finished the task, laid down the burden, attained the true goal, destroyed the bonds of becoming, and is released through right knowing. His five sense faculties still remain, and owing to their being intact, he is cognizant of the pleasant & the unpleasant, and is sensitive to pleasure & pain. That which is the passing away of passion, aversion, & delusion in him is termed the nibbana property with fuel remaining. And what is the nibbana property with no fuel remaining? There is the case where a monk is a worthy one... released through right knowing. For him, all that is sensed, being unrelished will grow cold right here. This is termed the nibbana property with no fuel remaining. -- Iti 44 The phrase referring to the range of feeling as 'growing cold right here' is a set expression describing death as experienced by one who has reached the goal. http://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/modern/thanissaro/likefire/2- 1.html Regards, NEO Swee Boon 18314 From: James Date: Mon Dec 30, 2002 8:38am Subject: Re: Keeping Sila --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "nidive " wrote: > > It is to my understanding that sa-upadi-sesa nibbana (nibbana with > fuel remaining) means that the arahant has not died yet (the five > aggregates are not extinguished yet). > > Monks, there are these two forms of the nibbana property. Which two? > The nibbana property with fuel remaining, and the nibbana property > with no fuel remaining. > > And what is the nibbana property with fuel remaining? There is the > case where a monk is a worthy one devoid of mental effluents, who > has attained completion, finished the task, laid down the burden, > attained the true goal, destroyed the bonds of becoming, and is > released through right knowing. His five sense faculties still > remain, and owing to their being intact, he is cognizant of the > pleasant & the unpleasant, and is sensitive to pleasure & pain. That > which is the passing away of passion, aversion, & delusion in him is > termed the nibbana property with fuel remaining. > > And what is the nibbana property with no fuel remaining? There is > the case where a monk is a worthy one... released through right > knowing. For him, all that is sensed, being unrelished will grow > cold right here. This is termed the nibbana property with no fuel > remaining. > > -- Iti 44 > > The phrase referring to the range of feeling as 'growing cold right > here' is a set expression describing death as experienced by one who > has reached the goal. > > http://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/modern/thanissaro/likefire/2- > 1.html > > > Regards, > NEO Swee Boon Hi NEO, I got that definition, exactly, from the Pali terms in the `Files' section of this group. http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/files/Glossary_of_pali _terms (*Hint* Everyone, if you get confused over the Pali terms used in these posts, this link is invaluable.) I agree with your sutta reference, but even though it doesn't mention death, it still applies to death. If the aggregates aren't completely released, they are still present upon death. The arahant of such a state cannot make them dissolve like the arahant who has achieved the proper level of tranquility and concentration. Just as the Buddha had to go into the fourth Jhana to dissolve the aggregates, the arahant of sa-upadi-sesa nibbana cannot do this. He/She cannot because insight was reached without the proper foundation of tranquility and concentration. Metta, James' Ps. I am going to reply to `knowing Nibbana' later. I think you and I just have different definitions of `knowing'. 18315 From: nidive Date: Mon Dec 30, 2002 8:44am Subject: Re: Keeping Sila Hi James, > Just as the Buddha had to go into the fourth Jhana to dissolve the > aggregates, the arahant of sa-upadi-sesa nibbana cannot do this. It is not to my understanding that the Buddha attained the fourth jhana to 'dissolve' the five aggregates. Any jhana is still of the five aggregates. Jhanas are five aggregates themselves. How do you dissolve aggregates with aggregates? Regards, NEO Swee Boon 18316 From: nidive Date: Mon Dec 30, 2002 8:47am Subject: Re: Keeping Sila Hi James, > Ps. I am going to reply to `knowing Nibbana' later. I think you > and I just have different definitions of `knowing'. I am going to sleep now. We'll talk tomorrow. By the way, do you spend a lot of your time in this group? Regards, NEO Swee Boon 18317 From: nina van gorkom Date: Mon Dec 30, 2002 10:00am Subject: Dhamma Issues, 2, fruition-attainment, no. 4 Dhamma Issues, 2, fruition-attainment, no. 4 The Commentary (of the Path of Discrimination) to the Chapter on ³Attainment of Cessation² (Nirodha Samåpatti, Ch XXXIV) explains three classifications of insight knowledge, vipassanå ñåna: ³There are three kinds of insight knowledge: insight as comprehension of formations (sankhåra parigganhanaka vipassanå 9) insight as fruition-attainment, phala-samåpatti vipassanå insight as cessation-attainment, nirodha-samåpatti vipassanå 10 These three kinds of vipassanå are explained as different: insight as comprehension of formations is paññå which understands conditioned dhammas, sankhåra dhammas, that is, nåma dhamma and rúpa dhamma; insight as fruition-attainment and insight as cessation attainment are degrees of insight knowledge which have as their aim to enter fruition-attainment and progressively cessation-attainment. For the latter two attainments it is necessary to be able to attain jhåna which is in conformity with those attainments.² 4. Lokuttara cittas have been classified by way of forty (according to the method of hundred and twentyone cittas), as different from the classification by way of eight (according to the method of eightynine cittas). They have been classified as forty in accordance with the levels of the five jhånas 11. The reason for this is that there are two kinds of ariyans: the ariyan who has lokuttara cittas accompanied by jhåna factors (of the different stages of jhåna) and who can therefore enter fruition-attainment, and the ariyan who has lokuttara cittas unaccompanied by jhåna factors and who can therefore not enter fruition-attainment. In what way is the ariyan who is a person with ³dry insight², sukkha vipassaka (without jhåna attainment), different from the ariyan who is able to attain jhåna, who is jhåna-låbhí (låbhí : possessing)? If the ariyan who is without jhåna attainment could enter fruition-attainment, he would be the same as the ariyan who is able to attain jhåna. There must be a difference between the ariyan with dry insight and the ariyan with jhåna attainment, who is jhåna låbhí. footnotes: 9. Pariganhati means to comprehend. This knowledge comprehends the conditioned realities, sankhåra dhammas as impermanent, dukkha, anattå. 10. Nirodha, cessation or extinction, is the temporary suspension of citta and cetasikas. Only anågåmís and arahats who have mastery of rúpa-jhånas and arúpa-jhånas can attain this. Corrections and additions to Issue 2, no1:end of footnote 4: peaceful abiding, arana vihara, which can lead to fruition-attainment. Add to footnote 8 (of no 3): We read in the same section of the ³Path of Discrimination², § 448: ³The first jhåna is an abiding without conflict...² and so on with all the stages of jhåna. Old footnote 9 is erased. 18318 From: nina van gorkom Date: Mon Dec 30, 2002 10:00am Subject: Re: [dsg] Way 30, Synopsis, sunnatavara Hi Larry :-) op 28-12-2002 21:14 schreef LBIDD@w... op LBIDD@w...:> I didn't follow what "kusala" had to do with > it, but the main point seemed to be that "atta", self, wasn't listed > among the list of 52 ultimate dhammas. N: There are many lists following, but it starts with the eight kusala cittas of the sense sphere. We can also see when reading on, that for kusala cittas and akusala cittas more cetasikas are needed then for the vipakacitta of seeing etc. As for me personally, I found it helpful to be reminded in Thailand that all this is not theory. Citta, cetasika and rupa have characteristics which can be directly understood without thinking about them. As we read about sunnatta in the Expositor: I was reminded that we cannot choose whether kusala citta or akusala citta arises after the votthapanacitta, determining-consciousness and the mind-door adverting-consciousness. These are extremely short moments and it depends on the accumulated cetasikas what will follow. In the Suttas we read about kusala and akusala following upon seeing, etc. and in the Abhidhamma we learn in detail about the processes: such as the kiriyacitta which is determining-consciousness or mind-door adverting-consciousness arising in between the vipåkacittas and the javana-cittas which are kusala citta or akusala citta. A friend (Kh Anop) said, it seems that there is I who acts, I who thinks. A. Sujin asked: what is I? The answer was : personality belief, sakkaya ditthi. What I also learnt: it is difficult to know the difference between citta and cetasika, and only through insight knowledge one can precisely know the difference, right at the moment they appear. But we cannot try to know the difference. >L: It's interesting that citta process is contemplated under cittanupassana > and dhammanupassana and own characteristic and general characteristic > (tilakkhana) are only contemplated under dhammanupassana. Although I'm > sure one could see that body, feeling, or consciousness are not self > while practicing those mindfulnesses. N: As far as I understand, first the specific characteristic of any dhamma that appears is gradually understood, no matter it is rupa, feeling, citta or dhamma. Later on the general characteristics of any dhamma that appears are gradually understood. L: Btw, it occured to me that "mindfulness" in the sense of attentiveness > is a better translation of "anupassana" than of "sati". I'm thinking of > the "look at" definition of anupassana here. "Mindfulness" in the sense > of being mindful of kusala dhamma or mindful of the truth would fit > "sati". What do you think? N: I do not think it matters what word we use. I was reminded that no words are needed when sati arises, sati is not thinking. Sati does not choose, it is naturally aware of whatever dhamma appears, also akusala. If there is no awareness of akusala we keep on taking akusala for self. We can use the word attention or attentiveness, but this is not intention to try. Or: noticing. Anupassana: passana : seeing. Anu: can mean to follow, or: again and again. For this person this word is helpful, for another person another word. You discussed concepts with Kom. As Kom explained, thinking itself is not a concept. We had many discussions before on this subject, but I learnt in Thailand that it is very useful to consider thinking of concepts when it occurs in our life. By reasoning and defining there will only be theoretical understanding of thinking. When we are fast asleep, there is life-continuum, bhavanga-citta. No world appears, no thinking of people, we do not know who we are. Only when process cittas arise there is seeing and thinking of what we see: the world appears. If there were no citta which thinks, there would not be any concepts, no world. I find as for myself that I have not considered this enough in my life. Nina. 18319 From: James Date: Mon Dec 30, 2002 10:04am Subject: Re: Keeping Sila --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "nidive " wrote: > Hi James, > > > Just as the Buddha had to go into the fourth Jhana to dissolve the > > aggregates, the arahant of sa-upadi-sesa nibbana cannot do this. > > It is not to my understanding that the Buddha attained the fourth > jhana to 'dissolve' the five aggregates. > > Any jhana is still of the five aggregates. Jhanas are five > aggregates themselves. How do you dissolve aggregates with > aggregates? > > > Regards, > NEO Swee Boon Hi NEO, Your understanding is mistaken. There is a difference between Jhanic states and supermundane Jhanic states. The latter is not dependent on the aggregates. Here is a sutta reference from the words of the Buddha: "There is the case, Sandha, where for an excellent thorough-bred of a man the perception of earth with regard to earth has ceased to exist; the perception of liquid with regard to liquid... the perception of heat with regard to heat... the perception of wind with regard to wind... the perception of the dimension of the infinitude of space with regard to the dimension of the infinitude of space... the perception of the dimension of the infinitude of consciousness with regard to the dimension of the infinitude of consciousness... the perception of the dimension of nothingness with regard to the dimension of nothingness... the perception of the dimension of neither perception nor non-perception with regard to the dimension of neither perception nor non-perception... the perception of this world with regard to this world... the next world with regard to the next world... and whatever is seen, heard, sensed, cognized, attained, sought after, pondered by the intellect: the perception with regard even to that has ceased to exist. Absorbed in this way, the excellent thoroughbred of a man is absorbed dependent neither on earth, liquid, heat, wind, the dimension of the infinitude of space, the dimension of the infinitude of consciousness, the dimension of nothingness, the dimension of neither perception nor non-perception, this world, the next world; nor on whatever is seen, heard, sensed, cognized, attained, sought after or pondered by the intellect -- and yet he is absorbed. And to this excellent thoroughbred of a man, absorbed in this way, the gods, together with Indra, the Brahmas & their chief queens, pay homage even from afar: Homage to you, O thoroughbred man. Homage to you, O superlative man -- of whom we have no direct knowledge even by means of that with which you are absorbed." http://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/modern/thanissaro/likefire/2- 1.html BTW, goodnight, we can discuss later; I hope your sleep is peaceful and without bad dreams. And, yes I spend a lot of my time in this group. Currently, this is the only Buddhist group I belong to. From my experience, it is the supreme group for those advanced in Buddhist studies. Metta, James 18320 From: christine_forsyth Date: Mon Dec 30, 2002 11:34am Subject: Yasodhara Dear Group, Can anyone refer me to articles on or writings mentioning details of Yasodhara? I have been looking but find there is a dearth of any such writings. She seems to be all but invisible, and, on the whole, not to have received much appreciation from the Theravada tradition. metta, Christine 18321 From: kenhowardau Date: Mon Dec 30, 2002 1:16pm Subject: Re: Tinker, Tailor, Soldier, Sailor.......lawyer, used car salesman Hi Andrew, I'm still playing full time host and haven't had time to become a complete know-it-all on the subject of virati(e.g., I can't quite follow the point you and Jon have been discussing). Pressing on regardless; you wrote: ------- > To mundane worldlings largely blind to the present moment and glimpsing it only in retrospect, we can but "work on" realising the relevance of nama-rupa. > ------- Yes, when we understand that there is only nama and rupa, then ideas of self, slaughterman, cow, etc., lose their appeal and we see the dangers of akusala kamma. We understand that the volition of the present moment is all that matters (all that can matter). -------------- >In the meantime, we may need some mundane prompting to look at what we do and its consequences for others > -------------- I don't see why. What better prompt can there be than to remember there is only nama and rupa? Why should we need to fall back on the purely conventional prompting to which non-Buddhists are limited? Isn't there a danger that conventional prompting will conceal the truth of conditionality and admit excuses for wrong action? (e.g., "I can't help it, I'm only human!") Kind regards Ken H PS Thanks for asking, but the surf at Noosa has been lousy -- as it has been for most of the past twelve months. There's a lot of indulgence to be `surfed off' before the Christmas pudding gets its turn. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Andrew " wrote: > --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "kenhowardau > " wrote: > > In reality, there are no Red > > Cross volunteers, no butchers, no occupations, just nama > > and rupa . -- the real Right Livelihood can > > occur anywhere at any time. It's hard to grasp and sometimes, > > we don't want to grasp it. The main thing is that we're working > > on it :-) > > > > Hi KenH > The above comment didn't seem right to me, 18322 From: phamdluan2000 Date: Mon Dec 30, 2002 2:06pm Subject: Re: Yasodhara Dear Christine, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "christine_forsyth " wrote: Dear Group, Can anyone refer me to articles on or writings mentioning details of Yasodhara? I have been looking but find there is a dearth of any such writings. She seems to be all but invisible, and, on the whole, not to have received much appreciation from the Theravada tradition. metta, Christine KKT: You might enjoy this exceptional article: A Mysterious Being: The Wife of Buddha by Professor Andre Bareau, University of Paris. http://www.buddha-kyra.com/wife.htm And also: http://www.buddhadust.org/TheOnes/theonesenglish235-247.htm Metta, KKT 18323 From: James Date: Mon Dec 30, 2002 2:17pm Subject: Re: Tinker, Tailor, Soldier, Sailor.......lawyer, used car salesman --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "kenhowardau " wrote: > Hi Andrew, > ------- > > To mundane worldlings largely blind to the present > moment and glimpsing it only in retrospect, we can but > "work on" realising the relevance of nama-rupa. > > ------- > >In the meantime, we may need some mundane prompting to > look at what we do and its consequences for others > > -------------- > > I don't see why. What better prompt can there be than to > remember there is only nama and rupa? Why should we need > to fall back on the purely conventional prompting to > which non-Buddhists are limited? Isn't there a danger > that conventional prompting will conceal the truth of > conditionality and admit excuses for wrong action? > (e.g., "I can't help it, I'm only human!") > > > Kind regards > Ken H Hi Ken H., If you don't mind, I am going to jump in here. Though I feel you don't hold me in high regard, never mind. Andrew is quite correct I feel; we must put our efforts more and more (continually actually) toward the mundane existences of others. Why? Such attention benefits others and our final goals. We are surrounded by the selfish; and, admittedly, we have a trace of the selfish in us as well. The way to help them and to help us is to be selfless. They want that (they count on us really) and we need that. To dedicate entire energies to `nama/rupa', `existence/non-existence', and `nibbana/samsara' is wrong. Such focusing will perpetuate the very thing we endeavor to cease; it will not end it. Do you want to become selfless? How do you do that in this mundane existence? Focus everything you have on the benefit of others; and do that with wisdom and patience. The rewards are sweet release of others and sweet release of your self…to ultimately to become non-self. I bet you know this already. I pray I have not offended. :-) Metta, James 18324 From: peterdac4298 Date: Mon Dec 30, 2002 2:34pm Subject: Re: Yasodhara --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "christine_forsyth " wrote: > Dear Group, > > Can anyone refer me to articles on or writings mentioning details of > Yasodhara? I have been looking but find there is a dearth of any > such writings. She seems to be all but invisible, and, on the whole, > not to have received much appreciation from the Theravada tradition. > > metta, > Christine Hi Christine In the PTS Dictionary of Proper Names, G.P.Malalasekera, she has an entire article all to herself, it is also cross referenced to Rahula and others. Some time ago I had a request from an Aussi Composer who was doing a project on her and asked me for some info. I knocked up an article from the DoPN entry and would have enclosed it here, but as you may have guessed, I can't for the life of me find it. I don't off hand know which page it is on, or which of the two volumes it is in as the Pali alphabet is a complete mystery to me. But it is in there trust me. I would post my article if I could find it, as I would appreciate some feed back on some of my foot notes to it. The only part that stumped me was a song that Yasodhara sang when she first saw her husband on his return to Kapilavastu as the Buddha, Dr Malalasekera only gives a reference to it. I have yet to find someone who is willing and able to do a sympathetic translation. I'll follow up with it as soon as I locate it. Cheers Peter 18325 From: peterdac4298 Date: Mon Dec 30, 2002 4:12pm Subject: Re: Yasodhara --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "christine_forsyth " wrote: > Dear Group, > > Can anyone refer me to articles on or writings mentioning details of > Yasodhara? I have been looking but find there is a dearth of any > such writings. She seems to be all but invisible, and, on the whole, > not to have received much appreciation from the Theravada tradition. > > metta, > Christine Hi Christine Just found that article:- Hi XXXXXX I copied the following from the "Dictionary of Pali Proper Names", G.P.Malalasekera, Pali Text Society, 1974, Vol II, pp 741. This book is difficult to navigate since it is in alphabetical order using the Pali alphabet. It is as authoritative as you can get for Theravadan Buddhism. However, you may well find it worth while asking in the Zen and especially Tibetan news groups for the variations according to these traditions, which can be quite insightful. The Tibetan sources are likely to be very rich in detail and narrative, especially of the rebirth stories. Please let me know if there is anything in this that is not quite clear. Also if there is anything else I can help with. Cheers Peter [My notes in square brackets] (My foot notes in round brackets. Please excuse occasional footnotes within footnotes.) Raahulamaataa(1). The name, generally given in the texts, of Raahula's mother and Gotama's wife. She is also called Bhaddakaccaa, and, in later texts, Yasodharaa, Bimbaadevii and, probably Bimbaasundarii. The Northern [Mahayana, which includes Tibetan] texts seem to favour the name of Yasodharaa, but they call her the daughter of Dandapaanii. It is probable that the name of Gotama's wife was Bimbaa, and that Bhaddakaccaa, Subhanddakaa, Yasodharaa and the others, were descriptive epithets applied to her, which later became regarded as additional names. It is also possible that in Gotama's court there was also a Yasodharaa, daughter of Dandapaanii, and that there was a later confusion of names. The Commentarial explanation, that she was called Bhaddakaccaanaa because her body was the colour of burnished gold, is probably correct. To suggest that the name bears any reference to the Kaccaanagotta seems to be wrong, because the Kaccaana was a brahmin gotta and the Saakyans were not brahmins [I do not know what a gotta is]. Raahulamaataa was born on the same day as the Bodhisatta [Title of the Buddha before his Awakening]. She married him (Gotama) at the age of sixteen, and was placed at the head of forty thousand women, given to Gotama by the Saakyans, after he had proved his manly prowess to their satisfaction. Gotama left the household life on the day of the birth of his son Raahula. It is said that just before he left home he took a last look at his wife from the door of her room, not daring to go nearer, lest he should awake her. When the Buddha paid his first visit to Kapilavatthu [Capital city of his fathers kingdom] after the Enlightenment, and on the second day of that visit, he begged in the street for alms(2). This news spread, and Raahulamaataa looked out of her window to see of it were true. She saw the Buddha, and was so struck by the glory of his personality [as a result of his tranquility, compassion and awareness] that she uttered eight verses in its praise. These verses have been handed down under the name of Narasiihagaathaa (3). On that day, after the Buddha had finished his meal in the palace, which he took at the invitation of Suddhodana [his father, the King], all the ladies of the court, with the exception of Raahulamaataa, went to pay him obeisance. She refused to go, saying that if she had any virtue in her the Buddha would come to her. The Buddha went to her with his two chief Disciples and gave orders that she should be allowed to greet him as she wished(4). She fell at his feet, and clasping them with her hands, put her head on them. Suddhodana related to the Buddha how, from the time he had left home, Raahulamaataa had herself abandoned all luxury and had lived in the same manner as she had heard that the Buddha lived - wearing yellow robes, eating only once a day, etc. And the Buddha then related the Candakinnara Jaataka [Rebirth story] to show how, in the past, too, her loyalty had been supreme. On the seventh day of the Buddha's visit, when he had left the palace at the end of his meal, Raahulamaataa sent Raahula to him saying, "That is your father, go and ask him for your inheritance"(5). Raahula followed the Buddha, and, at the Buddha's request, was ordained by Saariputta. Later, when the Buddha allowed women to join the Order, Raahulamaataa became a nun under Mahaapajaapatii Gotamii(6). Buddhaghosa(7) identifies Raahulamaataa with Bhaddakaccaanaa who, in the Anguttara Nikaaya [Collection of discourses or Suttas], is mentioned as chief among nuns in the possession of supernormal powers (8). She was one of the four disciples of the Buddha who possessed such attainment, the others being Saariputta, Moggallaana, [the Buddha's two chief disciples mentioned earlier] and Bakkula. She expressed her desire for this achievement in the time of Padumuttara Buddha [the Buddha of that earlier aeon]. In this account Bhaddakaccaanaa is mentioned as the daughter of the Saakyan Suppabuddha and his wife Amitaa. She joined the Order under Pajaapatii Gotamii in the company of Janapadakalyaanii (Nandaa), and in the Order she was known as Bhaddakaccaanaa Theri (9). Later, she developed insight and became an arahant, [ie a fully Awakened being]. She could, with one effort, recall one asankheyya and one hundred thousand kappas(10). In the Therii Apadaana an account is found of a Therii, Yasodharaa by name, who is evidently to be identified with Raahulamaataa, because she speaks of herself as the Buddha's pajaapatii before he left the household(11), and says that she was the chief of ninety thousand women. In the time of Diipankara Buddha, when the Bodhisatta [Buddha to be] was born as Sumedha, she was a brahmin-maiden, Sumittaa by name, and gave eight handfuls of lotuses to Sumedha, which he, in turn, offered to the then Buddha. Diipankara, in declaring that Sumedha would ultimately become the Buddha, added that Sumittaa would be his companion in several lives. The Apadaana account mentions how, just before her death, at the age of seventy-eight, she took leave of the Buddha and performed various miracles [See above and note (8)]. It also states that eighteen thousand arahant nuns, companions of Yasodharaa, also died on the same day(13). The Abbhantara Jaataka mentions the Bimbaadevii (who is called the chief wife of Gotama and is therefore evidently identical with Raahulamaataa) was once, after becoming a nun, ill from flatulence. When Raahula, as was his custom, came to visit her, he was told that he could not see her, but that, when she had suffered from the same trouble at home, she had been cured by mango-juice with sugar. Raahula reported the matter to his preceptor, Saariputta, who obtained the mango-juice from Pasenadi [probably a lay devotee]. When Pasenadi discovered why the mango- juice had been needed, he arranged that from that day it should be regularly supplied. The Jaataka relates how, in a past birth too, Saariputta had come to Raahulamaattaa'a rescue.(14) Numerous stories are found in the Jaataka Commentary in which Raahulamaataa is identified with one or other of the characters. In five lives she is the Queen, in two the Queen Consort, a wife in two, a female in two, a potters wife, a smith's wife, a mother, a woman ascetic, a mother-deer, and a named character in many more. -oOo- (1)Pronunciation. I have decided to use a subset of a well known system evolved for pure ascii - IBM - type key boards. Double vowels are stresses and pronounced as long versions of the single vowel. a as in hut not as in hat. u as in boot not as in under. aa as in 'far'. i as in pin not pine. ii as in pea not vine. e as in café not as in get. o as in boat not bottle. I have ignored double consonants, since they do not sound appreciably different from single consonants. Paired consonants are sounded separately. th as in hot house, not as in 'this' or 'faith'. c as in church not cake. So ch is as in beach-hut not as in church. This ought to be enough for the above passage. See http://www.accesstoinsight.org/index.html for a good intro for Theravada See http://www.enabling.org/ia/vipassana/Archive/N/Nyanatiloka/WOB/wobpr ef.htm#998977 for a good treatment of pronunciation. (2)In modern Thailand the alms round is not seen as begging. The monks traditional code of rules, [Vinaaya, laid down by the Buddha himself] sets strict procedures for the alms round, and lay supporters make their own special arrangements too. (3)I can probably extract these verses from the CDROM that I have containing the entire Pali Cannon, but would not be able to translate it. However, I have a friend who is very experienced at lucid translations of Pali text: the problem is though, he is currently a novice monk and his 'base' monastery is on winter retreat until the end of March, so I am not sure what I can do. Please let me know if this will be useful, as I can well imagine it could be. (4)Taking his two chief Disciples would have been an insurance against speculation and gossip concerning his and her emotively charged first meeting in the privacy of her own rooms. (5)From the article on Raahula in the same dictionary: ...Raahula Thera. Only son of Gotama and Yasodharaa. He was born on the day on which his father left the household life. When the Buddha visited Kapilavatthu for the first time after his Enlightenment and accepted Suddhodana's invitation, Raahula's mother Raahulamaataa sent the boy to the Buddha to ask for his inheritance. The Buddha gave him no answer, and, at the conclusion of the meal, left the palace [giving Raahula his alms bowl and asking him to carry it for him]. Raahula followed him, reiterating his request, until at last the Buddha asked Saariputta to ordain him(15). When Suddhodana [the King] heard of this he protested to the Buddha, and asked as a boon that, in future, no child should be ordained without the consent of his parents, and to this the Buddha greed(16)... (6)The Buddha's foster mother, his natural mother dying seven days after his birth, was the first woman to request acceptance into the Sangha. She was initially refused on the grounds that female membership would spoil the Sangha. However, by the Buddha's own admission, women were equally capable of attaining to full Awakening, and she was duly admitted. This is probably the earliest ever record of women's rights being claimed together with their due recognition: for that time this would have been very radical. (7)Buddhaghosa, the major Pali commentator of medieval or similar period, took most of his material from all the earlier commentaries, sorting and editing them into a set of comprehensive and coherent documents, whilst adding some of his own insights too. His work must have been good because all the earlier Commentarial documents were then neglected to such an extent that none of them survive today. (8)These were not miracles in the Biblical sense, ie intervention by God, but were more like the psychic gifts that some people even to day might have. But given the extent of her moral purity, mental clarity and focus, her abilities must have been quite impressive. (9)Theri, elder nun of at least ten rains, after twenty rains Mahatheri, also similar for Thera/Mahathera, monks. (10)Incalculable long periods of time, many universal contractions and expansions. (11)A term for dependence. Familiar to monks who use the term for formally taking dependence on their teacher for the period of the annual Rains retreat, in which the monks request support from the Abbott in supplying the allowable four material requisits, namely food, lodgings, robes and medicines(12) for the duration of the retreat. In return they undertake to support the Abbott with diligent practice to enhance his reputation as well as for his own personal satisfaction as a teacher, this training will include the taking care of all menial chores and general support for all his personal requirements. Hence here, this term would indicate a marital, [and hence devotional] vow of a student teacher kind [and would have been a reference to the Buddha's Enlightenment], rather than the more conventional equality vows. (12)In those 'low tech' days medicine would include things like butter and honey as well as all the usual herbal remedies. But animal parts would have been forbidden as part of the Buddha's rule prohibiting monks from exploiting an animal in any way whatsoever. Even meat was forbidden if it was either seen, heard or suspected to have been acquired especially for them. Though they were compelled to accept it if given with a pure heart, so as to avoid social discrimination against lower casts. (13) Were they all seventy eight too? Seriously though, no nuns were recorded as present at the Parinibbana [passing away of the Buddha] two years later, even though all other details of that event were reported in great detail. But the lineage must have survived somehow because nuns were sent to Sri Lanka during Ashoka's reign some three hundred years later. Having sent his son, the arahant Mahinda, Asoka followed this up by sending his daughter Theri Sangamitta with a sapling of the Bodhi Tree under which the Buddha attained enlightenment, thereby establishing the order of nuns in Sri Lanka: regrettably not surviving to day, though the sapling does at Anuradhapura and thus seems to be the worlds oldest documented tree! (14)It is Saariputta's rescue because he had, as the preceptor, direct access to lay support. Junior monks would have had no direct access and as such were dependent on the preceptors standing with lay supporters. In those misogynistic days Raahulamaattaa would have been equally, if not more, isolated: psychic powers and all. (15)This way Raahula gets the inheritance that his father is now capable of bequeathing to him rather than the conventional one which earlier had been renounced. (16)Suddhodana was now left without any heir to his throne, having lost both his son and his grand son, together with all the nobles who also left to join the Sangha. Consequently, the power vacuum resulting from his death, contributed to the destabilisation of the Ganges valley which was not resolved until the ascent of Emperor Ashoka, some three hundred years later. -oOo- 18326 From: nidive Date: Mon Dec 30, 2002 4:26pm Subject: Re: Keeping Sila Hi James > There is a difference between Jhanic states and supermundane > Jhanic states. The latter is not dependent on the aggregates. To my understanding, there isn't really anything called supramundane jhanic states. The supramundane path has the attributes of jhana simply because it has nibbana as its object. Yet the supramundane path is not any jhana at all. The shared attributes are: applied thought, sustained thought, rapture, happiness and one-pointedness. These attributes counter the five hindrances that are impediments to attaining jhana or the supramundane paths. > Here is a sutta reference from the words of the Buddha: The sutta reference you have given refers to the Attainment of Cessation. This is described in "A Critical Analysis of the Jhanas" by Henepola. This Cessation can only be reached in "five constituent becoming", i.e. in realms where all five aggregates are found. It cannot be reached in the immaterial realms since it must be preceded by the four fine material jhanas, which are lacking in those realms. Non-returners and arahants with the required qualifications (mastery of all eight mundane jhanas) attain to cessastion because, being wearied by the occurrence and dissolution of formations, they think: "Let us dwell in bliss by being without consciousness here and now and reaching the cessation that is nibbana." The Visuddhimagga Maha Tika points out that the phrase "cessation that is nibbana" means that cessation is similar to the nibbana element without residue. It should not be taken literally as establishing identity between the two. The Attainment of Cessation, ..., is neither mundane nor supramundane, neither conditioned nor non-conditioned. As the cessation of consciousness, it takes no object (not even nibbana). Regards, NEO Swee Boon 18327 From: Date: Mon Dec 30, 2002 4:33pm Subject: RE: [dsg] Re: Anatta - View of some scholars Hi Kom, I agree there is not enough in these commentary notes to say anything about nibbana. My main point of interest is that I had assumed that the "dhamma" in the sutta referred to sankhara and nibbana. This is apparently not the case. Rather, it refers to sankhara and concept as object of jhana. Perhaps this does not mean all concepts. Can we say the object of jhana, a concept, is experienced in a way that other concepts are not? Also, I'm not really certain if this sutta is saying anything about the Atman of Vedanta. Clearly it is pointing at ego clinging, but I don't know if it is going beyond that. I have a very vague recollection of reading that Vedanta is not identified in the suttas. If so, this would be an historical curiosity. As you say, nibbana could not be experienced as "oneself" like a khandha, so there would be no reason to include it here. From my point of view the reason to include nibbana as not self is to say nibbana is not the "Self" of Vedanta. But maybe that is just a modern question. Larry 18328 From: dotl Date: Mon Dec 30, 2002 4:40pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Yasodhara That is very interesting Peter..We were discussing The Budha's wife recently, and (as details are scarece and sketchy) I cant really comment much further than to say that My Teacher said She had died early on in Rahula's life, and he had been raised by an aunt. 18329 From: dotl Date: Mon Dec 30, 2002 4:43pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Yasodhara Sorry..I hit the send button inadvertantly!! I will be seeing my teacher(s) this weekend, and will ask again. Also the CD Rom of the Pali Canon.. I hear that this is being produced in English.does anyone have any further details on this? Love dotl 18330 From: bodhi2500 Date: Mon Dec 30, 2002 5:50pm Subject: Clinging Aggregates Hi Does anyone have any info on where the article/book >"Aggregates and Clinging Aggregates" can be found. Bhikkhu Bodhi has in Note 65 of the Khandhavagga of his translation of the Samyutta >For a detailed study of this problem see Bodhi,"Aggregates and clinging Aggregates." I'm not sure if he means Bhikkhu Bodhi is the author or it is in one of the Bodhi Leaves articles. I cant seem to find it anywhere. Thank-you. Steve. 18331 From: James Date: Mon Dec 30, 2002 6:23pm Subject: Re: Keeping Sila --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "nidive " wrote: > Hi James > > > There is a difference between Jhanic states and supermundane > > Jhanic states. The latter is not dependent on the aggregates. > > To my understanding, there isn't really anything called supramundane > jhanic states. The supramundane path has the attributes of jhana > simply because it has nibbana as its object. Yet the supramundane > path is not any jhana at all. The shared attributes are: applied > thought, sustained thought, rapture, happiness and one- pointedness. > These attributes counter the five hindrances that are impediments to > attaining jhana or the supramundane paths. > > > > Here is a sutta reference from the words of the Buddha: > > The sutta reference you have given refers to the Attainment of > Cessation. This is described in "A Critical Analysis of the Jhanas" > by Henepola. > > This Cessation can only be reached in "five constituent becoming", > i.e. in realms where all five aggregates are found. It cannot be > reached in the immaterial realms since it must be preceded by the > four fine material jhanas, which are lacking in those realms. > > Non-returners and arahants with the required qualifications (mastery > of all eight mundane jhanas) attain to cessastion because, being > wearied by the occurrence and dissolution of formations, they > think: "Let us dwell in bliss by being without consciousness here > and now and reaching the cessation that is nibbana." > > The Visuddhimagga Maha Tika points out that the phrase "cessation > that is nibbana" means that cessation is similar to the nibbana > element without residue. It should not be taken literally as > establishing identity between the two. > > The Attainment of Cessation, ..., is neither mundane nor > supramundane, neither conditioned nor non-conditioned. As the > cessation of consciousness, it takes no object (not even nibbana). > > > Regards, > NEO Swee Boon Hi NEO, Ugh!! You just had to awaken from your slumber didn't you!! ;-) Okay, I see that there is no escape. If I say `Up', you are going to say `Down', no matter what! That is plainly evident by the mess of mumbo jumbo you write in this post. What in the heck are you talking about? You write, `The supramundane path has the attributes of jhana… Yet the supramundane path is not any jhana at all.' Oh, this is really clear! ;-) It may look, taste, and smell like an apple, but it really isn't an apple. Why? Because Neo says so. Where is your support for this ridiculous assertion? You refer to the `Visuddhimagga Maha Tika', for an pretty much unrelated point, without proper citation, and frankly I have no clue what in the heck that is. What is the `Visuddhimagga Maha Tika'? Why should I believe it or know it? I am fairly sure many fairy tales and scandalous stories have impressive Pali names also, should I believe all of them? (And if this is some sort of obscure reference, and you quote it knowing that I will not know what it is, you are guilty of extreme conceit. Trying to outshine others is quite unnecessary. We are trying to reach the truth here…not be `know-it-alls') Please Neo, I have more important things to do than to play tit-for- tat when you don't provide proper citations or analysis. I will ignore you from this point forward if you don't substantiate your claims with proper research and logic. Metta, James 18332 From: peterdac4298 Date: Mon Dec 30, 2002 6:31pm Subject: Re: Yasodhara Hi KKT Having just read the article at your link: http://www.buddha-kyra.com/wife.htm I can't help thinking that the general conclusion is that we don't know much about the Buddha's wife. This must make perfect sense if we consider that the early Cannon is nothing other than what the Buddha taught for the training of his disciples, either Vinaya or Suttanta. Details of his previous domestic life, particularly of his parents, wife and family must surely be irrelevant if not actually distracting for these purposes. The little we know of Yasodhara and all the others is consistent with the teaching: it is either contributing to the confidence we have in our reflections on the Buddha or exhibiting points of discipline or insight. Cheers Peter --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "phamdluan2000 " wrote: > > Dear Christine, > > > --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "christine_forsyth > " wrote: > > > Dear Group, > > Can anyone refer me to articles on or writings mentioning details of > Yasodhara? I have been looking but find there is a dearth of any > such writings. She seems to be all but invisible, and, on the whole, > not to have received much appreciation from the Theravada tradition. > > metta, > Christine > > > > > KKT: You might enjoy this exceptional article: > > A Mysterious Being: The Wife of Buddha > by Professor Andre Bareau, University of Paris. > > http://www.buddha-kyra.com/wife.htm > > And also: > > http://www.buddhadust.org/TheOnes/theonesenglish235-247.htm > > > Metta, > > > KKT 18333 From: peterdac4298 Date: Mon Dec 30, 2002 6:40pm Subject: [dsg] Re: Yasodhara Hi dotl I was only quoting the PTS DoPPN. My own additional notes were for the benefit of a non-Buddhist who was working on a project for a musical score. It could well be that your teacher is right. Cheers Peter --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "dotl" wrote: > That is very interesting Peter..We were discussing The Budha's wife > recently, and (as details are scarece and sketchy) I cant really comment > much further than to say that My Teacher said She had died early on in > Rahula's life, and he had been raised by an aunt. 18334 From: Kom Tukovinit Date: Mon Dec 30, 2002 6:50pm Subject: RE: RE: [dsg] Re: Anatta - View of some scholars Dear Larry, -----Original Message----- From: LBIDD@w... [mailto:LBIDD@w...] I agree there is not enough in these commentary notes to say anything about nibbana. My main point of interest is that I had assumed that the "dhamma" in the sutta referred to sankhara and nibbana. This is apparently not the case. Rather, it refers to sankhara and concept as object of jhana. Perhaps this does not mean all concepts. Can we say the object of jhana, a concept, is experienced in a way that other concepts are not? ========= I am not sure if the first sutta (Bahudhatuka)'s dhamma is supposed to include nibbana or not. I think it might be implicitly (although the commentary doesn't say this): we may have to look for earlier commentaries in MN or DN to see if this has been explained before this sutta or not. I think the concept of the jhana is the same as the concept of everything else: it has no characteristic (sabhava). However, we need to note that the aramana of jhana cittas are classified as: mahaccata (sp?) aramana, i.e., aramana that can condition the jhana absorption. In order for a jhana meditator to reach the level of upacara (access concentration), and uppana (jhana concentration), the conceptual object must be vividly kept in mind that it appears to the meditator even when not looking at the object... here. From my point of view the reason to include nibbana as not self is to say nibbana is not the "Self" of Vedanta. But maybe that is just a modern question. ========= I have almost no idea about Vedanta teaching, so I don't think I can add any more here... kom 18335 From: Date: Mon Dec 30, 2002 3:33pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Not Self = Voidness? This is an interesting quote from the Patisambhidamagga on a subject often debated about... "Contemplation-of-Not-self, and Contemplation-of-Voidness -- are these states different in meaning and different in letter, or are they one in meaning and only the letter is different? Contemplation-of-Not-self, and Contemplation-of-Voidness -- these states are one in meaning and only the letter is different." (Patisambhidamagga, Treatise on Liberation, #82) TG 18336 From: Andrew Date: Mon Dec 30, 2002 8:45pm Subject: Re: Tinker, Tailor, Soldier, Sailor.......lawyer, used car salesman --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "James " wrote: Do you want to > become selfless? How do you do that in this mundane existence? > > Metta, James Hello all First of all, I want to thank Jon and Sarah for their serious replies to my ramblings. I do greatly appreciate your input, challenging as it is. I don't reply immediately, if at all, as I need to give your comments much reflection. I am inspired, however, by your generosity with time and your patience. To Christine and KenH, thanks for your further input, likewise subject to further reflection. I dont' always fully reply to you guys because I think we meet up and can talk about things then. Probably a bad excuse! Thanks James for better stating the question that has bothered me (above). I haven't yet worked out the interplay between mundane and supra-mundane and have a great deal of study to do. In my present ignorance, I think as follows: Unlike Jesus, Buddha didn't command cripples to walk and stand by and watch a miracle. Buddha more said "You've got to be subject to a curative process before you can expect to walk." No miracles. I am a cripple because of my ignorance. I am a mundane worldling. I can understand the supra-mundane only up to a certain point. There is much work to do before I reach the supra-mundane level and can REALISE what before I only understood intellectually. Is not telling me not to think about conventional livelihoods but to focus on the present moment - commanding a cripple to walk? Do we not NEED to go through all the conventional stuff as we slowly move away from the elephant? I already have a feeling that I have misrepresented some of you and I apologise in advance. I will continue studying and maybe look back on this email and think "Did I write that?" Sorry guys. Happy New Year to all. Andrew 18337 From: Date: Mon Dec 30, 2002 9:56pm Subject: RE: RE: [dsg] Re: Anatta - View of some scholars Hi Kom, I think the commentators were making a point specifically about concepts which were objects of jhana. Would this be a nimita (sign)? Is a nimita a visualization? If so, I could see how a visualization or dream could be regarded as self. Also visualizations and dreams are "near" khandhas. Maybe that is the criterion they are using here and the reason only certain kinds of concept in certain conditions would be considered as self. Mathematics wouldn't be considered as self. What we are talking about is a psychological self and there is no psychology in nibbana so there would be no reason to say nibbana is not self. It is not self _by_definition_. Larry 18338 From: Sarah Date: Mon Dec 30, 2002 10:48pm Subject: Re: [dsg] NEO of The Matrix (Was:Re: Dhamma Issues...etc.) Hi James, --- "James " wrote: > > Hi Sarah, > > I am glad that you are enjoying the posts. It is a fascinating > subject and I plan to write more a bit later. However, I am not > sure why you find this post by NEO helpful. Would you be willing to > explain? I find the conclusion about Nibbana that he draws from > this sutta to be incorrect. ..... I’ll try, though I think Swee Boon(NEO) does an excellent job of substantiating his comments calmly and clearly in the post I drew your attention to and also in later ones. You may also like to consider the summary from a footnote Nina recently gave in Dhamma Issues, Ch2, no1 which I’ve put at the end of this post.* Full details can be found in the Visuddhimagga. As Swee Boon suggests, nibbana is the unconditioned dhamma which is realized or known by the very highly developed wisdom and associated mental factors accompanying the supramundane consciousness. This consciousness is conditioned, impermanent, unsatisfactory and without any self, like all other sankhara dhammas. When it falls away, the fruition consciousness experiences nibbana too, momentarily, but afterwards there is seeing and hearing, just like now, followed by accumulated wholesome and unwholesome states except in the arahant’s case. In the arahant’s case, all defilements have been eradicated, as discussed, and instead of wholesome consciousness, there is inoperative (kiriya) consciousness - no new kamma is accumulated. For the rest of his life, the arahant still experiences the results of previous kamma however. At the end of his life, however, there are no causes for further rebirth and this is parinibbana. As Swee Boon explained, the Buddha is not nibbana. The Buddha also cannot be felt or experienced in anyway (as you suggested to Larry, I think). In reality the Buddha never existed, just as a self never exists. When we refer to the Buddha, it is also to the 5 khandhas as it is to ‘James’ or ‘Swee Boon’. The 5 khandhas that made up ‘the Buddha’ finally disintegrated for the last time at his parinibbana. The 5 khandhas making up ‘James’ will continue to arise and fall away indefinitely while there are conditions to do so, lifetime after lifetime. When we think we can ‘experience’ or ‘feel’ the Buddha, it is in truth just thinking about concepts accompanied by different mental states and pleasant, unpleasant or neutral feelings. When there is no thinking in this way, where is the Buddha? So we can see that it is the thinking that ‘exists’ and can be known, the thinking which is impermanent and without self. When we are carried away by the story or lost in the ‘fantasy’, there is no awareness or understanding of the paramattha dhamma. Regardless of whether there is any wisdom accumulated or not, there are still only the 5 khandhas and no self to be found. You also wondered in some earlier posts to Ray and others why there are differences amongst the fully enlightened, even though all defilements have been eradicated. There is no choice involved when it comes to accumulations or conditioned realities. There is only ever one Buddha in any Buddhist era and no Buddha within us.When we read about the great arahants in the Buddha’s time, we can see the different tendencies of each, even though for all of them, the defilemets had been eradicated and there would be no rebirth. Along the way, the diversity of types and tendencies is always stressed as well. There was a helpful comment in the recent extract from the Way on this point (Way 31): ..... “Still, everywhere, the abandoning of the defilements has been stated by way of the different types of persons and by way of the diversity of the thought-unit, in which the development of the different subjects of the Arousing of Mindfulness takes place [nana puggalavasena pana nana cittakkhana satipatthana bhavanavasena ca sabbattha vuttam]. Or it should be understood thus: It is stated in this manner in order to indicate that the abandoning of the defilements in one object implies the abandoning of the defilements in the remaining objects.” ***** the Tika (sub-commentary) notes gave further detail, including: “The abandoning of the defilements of one object in the thought-unit of the Path is indeed the abandoning of the defilement of all objects. it is right to say that by the Path, are the defilements abandoned.” ***** Besides wishing to give Swee Boon a little encouragement to continue helping with his inspiring posts, I also wished to give you the encouragement to really consider what he is writing carefully, to continue your reflections and research and not to give up when the going gets tough;-) Just take a break from time to time (and some sleep;-))- it doesn’t matter who has the last word, whose high regard we have or whether ‘good cheer’ posters like Azita zap us all;-) I’ve greatly appreciated your recent attempts to come to terms with many of the difficult and subtle points, to pull out relevant suttas and to keep an open mind. I know you do many lurkers a really great favour by expressing your doubts and opinions and also by encouraging other members like Swee Boon to articulate their deep consideration of the suttas. In appreciation, Sarah p.s Thanks for your photgraphic efforts - Howard looked very cheery, but I think I’ll stick to the original feeble version with grey (gray) hair;-) ===== * “When paññå has been developed to the degree that enlightenment can be attained, lokuttara cittas, supramundane cittas experiencing nibbåna arise. The magga-citta (path-consciousness), which is lokuttara kusala citta, directly experiences nibbåna. When the magga-citta has fallen away, it is immediately succeeded by its result, the phala-citta (fruition-consciousness), which is lokuttara vipåkacitta, also experiencing nibbåna. There are four stages of enlightenment and at each stage defilements are eradicated by the magga-citta until they are all eradicated at the fourth stage, the stage of the arahat. The magga-citta of a particular stage of enlightenment arises only once in the cycle of birth and death.......” ============================= 18339 From: Kom Tukovinit Date: Mon Dec 30, 2002 10:53pm Subject: RE: RE: [dsg] Re: Anatta - View of some scholars Dear Larry, > -----Original Message----- > From: LBIDD@w... [mailto:LBIDD@w...] > > > Hi Kom, > > I think the commentators were making a point > specifically about concepts > which were objects of jhana. Would this be a > nimita (sign)? Is a nimita > a visualization? The word used in the commentaries is "kasina" (not translated to Thai). > If so, I could see how a > visualization or dream could > be regarded as self. Also visualizations and > dreams are "near" khandhas. Yes, I think you are right. > self. Mathematics wouldn't be considered as self. > What we are talking > about is a psychological self and there is no > psychology in nibbana so > there would be no reason to say nibbana is not > self. It is not self > _by_definition_. > This sounds right to me. On the other hand, if I were to come from a point where I think nibbana is an unconditioned consciousness, then it would be easy for me to think that with all the conditioned consciousness stripped out, what remains is the true self, even if it might not be a distinct self. Don't you think? kom 18340 From: James Date: Mon Dec 30, 2002 11:28pm Subject: [dsg] NEO of The Matrix (Was:Re: Dhamma Issues...etc.) --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Sarah wrote: > Hi James, > ===== > * "When paññå has been developed to the degree that enlightenment can be > attained, lokuttara cittas, supramundane cittas experiencing nibbåna > arise. > The magga-citta (path-consciousness), which is lokuttara kusala citta, > directly experiences nibbåna. When the magga-citta has fallen away, it is > immediately succeeded by its result, the phala-citta > (fruition-consciousness), which is lokuttara vipåkacitta, also > experiencing > nibbåna. Hi Sarah, I absolutely, 100% disagree with this. I don't care if it is written down, if you and NEO agree with it or not. The Buddha specifically taught the opposite of these outlandish statements. No cittas, supramundane or not, experience Nibbana. I have already quoted extensively from the Buddha regarding this. Nibbana is not and never could be an object of the mind. And I also think that you have the wrong idea of what the aggregates are, but I am going to drop it. You know too much to be told otherwise. I don't 'know' anything, I only feel. Frankly, I am glad that I don't 'know' as much as you and NEO. You seem to forget the heart. However, please don't presume to tell me what I feel. I know what I feel. I feel the Buddha in all of those situations I described. I am sorry you never have. Metta, James 18341 From: Sarah Date: Tue Dec 31, 2002 0:35am Subject: NUM - looking at the moon on a cloudy night Hi Num, I hope you’ve managed to have some break from the hospital and all its demands over Christmas. It was great to spend a little more time with you in Thailand last month. I meant to add one or two comments after you kindly posted extract 6 from your series form Patisambhidamagga (Path of Discrimination) and its commentaries (not available in English). I particularly liked the following quote and had meant to include it when I wrote to Rob Ep about the various sakayaditthi (wrong views of self). I was just reflecting onyour comments when I was reading Nina’s ‘Dhamma Issues’. It’s very deep in meaning, I think and combines deep abhidhamma knowledge with common metaphors. ..... “ If one wants to cross a river and stand on the other side of the river. He grasps a rope, which tied to a tree, then he jumps and takes off fast. He then stands on the other side of the river. He is no longer frightened. One, who wants to overcome defilement, sees the dangers of sakayaditthi on this side of the river. He crosses the river and stands on the other side of the river, nibbana, which has no danger. He first grasps rupakhandha or namakhandha with udayabbayanupassana. Then he jumps with avajjana-citta, and takes off with anuloma-nana. He is then close to the other side of the river, he sees nibbaba, and lets go of the rope with gotarabhunana. He then lands on ground, which is nibbana, with magganana.” ..... It makes me smile - landing on the ground with magganana (Path wisdom). A long way to go before landing on the ground. Meanwhile, of more relevance to most of us is: "One, who wants to overcome defilement, sees the dangers of sakayaditthi (self views) on this side of the river." Let's keep focussed on the problems on this side before without too much concern about the moon behind the clouds;-) Earlier you wrote: “magganana dries the vast ocean of dukkha....’’Very descriptive and it appears in the quote below as well. As I understand, ‘Uddayabayanupassana’(above) refers to the knowledge of the rise and fall, the first of the 9 insight knowledges in the patipada nanadassana visuddhi (purification by knowledge and vision of path progress).* A detailed account of the nanas (stages of vipassana) is given in the Visuddhimagga. A particularly helpful summary is also given in the ‘Stages of Vipassana” in K.Sujin’s ‘Survey’ which Rob K and others are currently preparing for publication. http://www.abhidhamma.org/Para12.htm ..... You also quoted from the commentary to the Patisambhidamagga: “One wants to see the moon in a cloudy night. When the wind blows the thick cloud away little by little, one then can see the moon. Anulomanana is the wind that blows avijja away, but the wind does not see the moon. A man, gotarabhunana, sees the moon, but he himself cannot eradicate the darkness from the cloud. Magganana, which gets a signal from gotarabhu, absorbs into nibbaba, so it can eradicate lobha. Like an archer gets a signal from others, he then lets go of his arrow. His arrow is able to pierce through 100 layers of targets. Magganana dries up the vast ocean of sankaradukkha, closes all doors of bad direction, fulfills one with 7 ariya assets, lets go of miccamagga, subdues all dangers, and 100 times more of other benefit” ..... I like your translation. Lots of difficult points that also tie in with Nina’s series on Dhamma Issues - the subtle points raised on supramundane consciousness and so on at the Foundation. Many thanks and hope to hear more from you. Sarah ====== *When the vipassana nanas (insight knowledges) are classified as nine, they start with this knowledge of the arising and falling away of namas and rupas and end with anuloma knowledge (adaptation knowledge). These nine are the balava vipassana (vipassana as powers)and have to arise and be developed before the attainment to enlightenment. Only when insight is highly developed by following these stages can the anuloma nana (adaptation knowledge)’conform’ to the realization of nibbana and be followed by the gotrabhu nana (change of lineage knowledge), magga nana (path knowledge), phala nana (fruition knowledge) and paccavekkhana nana (reviewing knowledge). ======================= 18342 From: Sarah Date: Tue Dec 31, 2002 0:45am Subject: Happy New Year and No Need to Agree..... Hi James, --- "James " wrote: > > Hi Sarah, > > I absolutely, 100% disagree with this. ..... No problem....we don't need to agree and I probably came in with the wrong words at the wrong time, even though I meant well. There will be plenty of others who also agree with your points in this regard and be glad to hear your spirited defence of them anytime. I apologise for any offence caused with any 'unfeeling' comments. Get some rest so that you can enjoy the New Year tonight;-)Must be pretty close for Rob K in New Zealand.... Happy New Year to everyone else too. metta, Sarah ====== 18343 From: christine_forsyth Date: Tue Dec 31, 2002 1:17am Subject: Re: Yasodhara Hi Peter, I am so glad I asked the question about Yasodhara, I have been uncomfortable since ever I heard Gotama had deserted her on the night their son was born. Your post to KKT below is quite a logical explanation for the Yasodhara-shaped gap in the Canon. I'll save your article for re-reading along with the links KKT gave me. As well, I think I might try to obtain "Dictionary of Pali Proper Names", G.P.Malalasekera, Pali Text Society, 1974, Vol II - Sarah mentioned it once before as well. Thank you. metta, Christine --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "peterdac4298 " wrote: > Hi KKT > > Having just read the article at your link: > > http://www.buddha-kyra.com/wife.htm > > I can't help thinking that the general conclusion is that we don't > know much about the Buddha's wife. This must make perfect sense if > we consider that the early Cannon is nothing other than what the > Buddha taught for the training of his disciples, either Vinaya or > Suttanta. > > Details of his previous domestic life, particularly of his parents, > wife and family must surely be irrelevant if not actually > distracting for these purposes. The little we know of Yasodhara and > all the others is consistent with the teaching: it is either > contributing to the confidence we have in our reflections on the > Buddha or exhibiting points of discipline or insight. > > Cheers > Peter > > --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "phamdluan2000 > " wrote: > > > > Dear Christine, > > > > > > --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "christine_forsyth > > " wrote: > > > > > > Dear Group, > > > > Can anyone refer me to articles on or writings mentioning details > of > > Yasodhara? I have been looking but find there is a dearth of any > > such writings. She seems to be all but invisible, and, on the > whole, > > not to have received much appreciation from the Theravada > tradition. > > > > metta, > > Christine > > > > > > > > > > KKT: You might enjoy this exceptional article: > > > > A Mysterious Being: The Wife of Buddha > > by Professor Andre Bareau, University of Paris. > > > > http://www.buddha-kyra.com/wife.htm > > > > And also: > > > > http://www.buddhadust.org/TheOnes/theonesenglish235-247.htm > > > > > > Metta, > > > > > > KKT 18344 From: christine_forsyth Date: Tue Dec 31, 2002 1:18am Subject: Re: Yasodhara Dear KKT, I appreciate these links. I did indeed enjoy the article by Professor Andre Bareau, so densely packed with information, that it will need to be read and re-read. Thank you. (Part of each day I work in the Maternity Section of the hospital - a common occurrence is for pregnant women to feel rather unreasonably disenchanted with the process at about 36 weeks with 4 weeks still to. I am struck mute with awe at the very idea of Yasodhara's 312 weeks. :-)) metta, Christine --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "phamdluan2000 " wrote: > > Dear Christine, > > > --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "christine_forsyth > " wrote: > > > Dear Group, > > Can anyone refer me to articles on or writings mentioning details of > Yasodhara? I have been looking but find there is a dearth of any > such writings. She seems to be all but invisible, and, on the whole, > not to have received much appreciation from the Theravada tradition. > > metta, > Christine > > > > > KKT: You might enjoy this exceptional article: > > A Mysterious Being: The Wife of Buddha > by Professor Andre Bareau, University of Paris. > > http://www.buddha-kyra.com/wife.htm > > And also: > > http://www.buddhadust.org/TheOnes/theonesenglish235-247.htm > > > Metta, > > > KKT 18345 From: Ramindu Weeratna Date: Tue Dec 31, 2002 1:27am Subject: Re : Yasodhara Threrani @ Thripitaka. Dear Christine, Details of Yasodhara Therani can be found in Thripitaka @ Kuddaka nikaya - Apadana Pali - Thri aapadana.. I'v heard that, She set out on the journey of becoming Siduhath’s (Lord Buddha before attaining Nirvana) wife same time as he started his journey about 20 Asanka+1000000 Kalpas ago (Manoprani Dhana). With Metta Ram ----- Original Message ----- From: "christine_forsyth " Date: Mon, 30 Dec 2002 19:34:24 -0000 To: dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com Subject: [dsg] Yasodhara > Dear Group, > > Can anyone refer me to articles on or writings mentioning details of > Yasodhara? I have been looking but find there is a dearth of any > such writings. She seems to be all but invisible, and, on the whole, > not to have received much appreciation from the Theravada tradition. > > metta, > Christine -- 18346 From: christine_forsyth Date: Tue Dec 31, 2002 1:31am Subject: Re: Clinging Aggregates Hi Steve, On p. 1992 of Samyutta Nikaya - Bibliography II Translations and Secondary Works Bodhi, Bhikku. "Aggregates and Clinging Aggregates" Pali Buddhist Review 1 (1976): 91-102 metta, Christine --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "bodhi2500 " wrote: > Hi > Does anyone have any info on where the article/book >"Aggregates > and Clinging Aggregates" can be found. Bhikkhu Bodhi has in Note 65 > of the Khandhavagga of his translation of the Samyutta >For a > detailed study of this problem see Bodhi,"Aggregates and clinging > Aggregates." I'm not sure if he means Bhikkhu Bodhi is the author or > it is in one of the Bodhi Leaves articles. > I cant seem to find it anywhere. > Thank-you. > Steve. 18347 From: christine_forsyth Date: Tue Dec 31, 2002 2:22am Subject: Re: Re : Yasodhara Threrani @ Thripitaka. Hi Ram, Thanks Ram - though I'm not sure if this is available in an English translation. I have heard before that Yasodhara was a great being who made the aspiration to be Gotama's wife an unimaginably long time ago. That is an interesting perspective to consider ... metta, Christine --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Ramindu Weeratna" wrote: > Dear Christine, > > Details of Yasodhara Therani can be found in Thripitaka @ Kuddaka nikaya - Apadana Pali - Thri aapadana.. > > I'v heard that, She set out on the journey of becoming Siduhath's (Lord Buddha before attaining Nirvana) wife same time as he started his journey about 20 Asanka+1000000 Kalpas ago (Manoprani Dhana). > > > > With Metta > Ram > > Meet Singles > http://corp.mail.com/lavalife 18348 From: peterdac4298 Date: Tue Dec 31, 2002 2:32am Subject: Re: Yasodhara --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "christine_forsyth " wrote: > Hi Peter, > > I am so glad I asked the question about Yasodhara, > As well, I think I might try to obtain "Dictionary of Pali Proper > Names", G.P.Malalasekera, Pali Text Society, 1974, Vol II - Sarah > mentioned it once before as well. Thank you. > > metta, > Christine Hi Christine You may as well get both volumes while you are at it, as they are quite cheep, maybe ukp15 each or so. Unless of course you are restricted for shelf space, they are quite large! Cheers Peter 18349 From: peterdac4298 Date: Tue Dec 31, 2002 2:54am Subject: Re: Yasodhara --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "christine_forsyth " wrote: > Hi Peter, > > I am so glad I asked the question about Yasodhara, I have been > uncomfortable since ever I heard Gotama had deserted her on the > night their son was born. Hi Christine I think this may indicate the depth of anguish that the Boddhisatva must have been suffering in that moment. It may provide some indication of the motivational power that would drive him through all the trials that were to follow. Maybe Yasodhara understood this? Either way, it is quite a strong statement. Cheers Peter 18350 From: Ramindu Weeratna Date: Tue Dec 31, 2002 2:57am Subject: Re: [dsg] Keeping Sila Dear Christine, No u r not missing any thing, Pan sil (5 Precepts) are the minimum which is required of a Buddhist. If one keeps to these 5, this person is guaranteed of a birth as a human or higher level. It is said that 5 good things come to those who practice it, 1-welth(basically) will be achieved (Good news..!) 2-will be popular amongst ppl 3-fear less amongst any gathering 4-death will be with mindfulness 5-born in good place Further more, Sil is the basis on which u should practice Meditation. With perfection of seela good samadhi can be achived. Seela is the FOUNDATION...! May u keep pure sila..! :) With Metta Ram ----- Original Message ----- From: "christine_forsyth " Date: Sun, 29 Dec 2002 02:42:09 -0000 To: dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com Subject: [dsg] Keeping Sila > Dear Group, > > I have been reading around the topic of Sila, what Sila is, Keeping > Sila, possible changes to Sila, and Sila as silabbataparamasa > (clinging to sila and wrong practice). > > In the Kimmatha Sutta, the Buddha says that keeping Sila leads to > arahantship. Seems pretty straight forward to me, unless there's a > hidden meaning. > 'Ven. Ananda went to the Blessed One and on arrival, having bowed > down to him, sat to one side. As he was sitting there he said to the > Blessed One: "What is the purpose of skillful virtues? What is their > reward?" > <<>> > The Blessed One explained: "Ananda, skillful virtues lead step-by- > step to the consummation of arahantship." ' > http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/anguttara/an11-001.html > > Keeping Sila as the Suttas set it out sometimes seems to be > presented as old-fashioned and outdated, clinging to rules, something > that can change for those more advanced on the Way because of the > higher level of panna that arises, something that can change with the > times, or that can change with the mores of different cultures. > I occasionally have the feeling some are implying that there is not > just one wholesome Code of Conduct for all Buddhists, in the Training > Rules. I almost feel that there is one way for the manyfolk but > another way for those with greater understanding. > > The Buddha spoke of the eight rewards in AN VIII.39, Abhisanda > Sutta 'Rewards'. They consisted of going for Refuge to the Buddha, > Dhamma and Sangha, plus the five gifts (precepts). Isn't that a > lovely term for the Precepts? > http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/anguttara/an08-039.html > "Now, there are these five gifts, five great gifts -- original, long- > standing, traditional, ancient, unadulterated, unadulterated from the > beginning -- that are not open to suspicion, will never be open to > suspicion, and are unfaulted by knowledgeable contemplatives & > priests. Which five? > "There is the case where a disciple of the noble ones, abandoning the > taking of life, abstains from taking life. In doing so, he gives > freedom from danger, freedom from animosity, freedom from oppression > to limitless numbers of beings. In giving freedom from danger, > freedom from animosity, freedom from oppression to limitless numbers > of beings, he gains a share in limitless freedom from danger, freedom > from animosity, and freedom from oppression. This is the first gift, > the first great gift -- original, long-standing, traditional, > ancient, unadulterated, unadulterated from the beginning -- that is > not open to suspicion, will never be open to suspicion, and is > unfaulted by knowledgeable contemplatives & priests. And this is the > fourth reward of merit..." > Each of the other Precepts is taught and the words > "original, long-standing, traditional, ancient, unadulterated, > unadulterated from the beginning" are repeated each time. > > From an Abhidhamma perspective, can I integrate RobK's reminders in > post 17647 and 17694, when he says, 'I think the only way is to > really learn to see the characteristics of dhammas; then, so I > believe, panna will know what is ultimately right or wrong; it is > never us actually who is or is not keeping sila.' ... and ... 'Sila > is a necessary part of the development of insight but sometimes we > forget that sila is a really a very brief moment of conditioned nama. > We tend to think I am keeping sila and that is still clinging to > concept', by reference to the Cetana Sutta AN XI.2 'An Act of Will', > http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/anguttara/an11-002.html > > "Skillful virtues have freedom from remorse as their purpose, freedom > from remorse as their reward. In this way, mental qualities lead on > to mental qualities, mental qualities bring mental qualities to their > consummation, for the sake of going from the near to the Further > Shore." > > ... or am I still missing something about how we are to live in this > world? > > metta, > Christine -- 18351 From: Ramindu Weeratna Date: Tue Dec 31, 2002 3:08am Subject: Re: [dsg] Prophetic tradition within Buddhism No I don’t think so. Since it is v. difficult to think Its best left alone :) (There however are theories in science such as parallel time lines, etc etc) In Buddhism there are lots of stuff, which are unthinkable & are asked to be left alone like end of universe, beginning of samsara, the science of Karma, the science of beings. This is because not only our minds, but minds with various jana’s cant even comprehend some of these things. Until u achive some leavel in Buddhism, its hard even to get an idea of the true processes of these things I don’t thing these things can be explained that easily. That’s why there is a Abidhamma pitaka in Thripitaka. If u learn it u’ll come to have some sense. Any way, If v have the ability, we can look ahead & stop doing stuff, but since v cant c the future, I think well have to do stuff. :-) With Metta Ram ----- Original Message ----- From: "christine_forsyth " Date: Mon, 30 Dec 2002 11:05:45 -0000 To: dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com Subject: Re: [dsg] Prophetic tradition within Buddhism > Hi Ram, > > Thanks for this information - I found it very interesting. Does the > fact that people can see the future, mean it is already settled? > Wouldn't this mean there is no point in making any effort to listen > to and follow the Dhamma - what difference would it make if the > future already exists? > > metta, > Christine > --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Ramindu Weeratna" > wrote: > > Sorry for the late reply Christine, > > > > Being able to see the future is not only done by Buddhas, I hear it > was done by yogis in ancient times. > > Do u know of the teacher of king suddodana - Asita KalaDevala. he > was a brakmana(non Buddhist) who had the Anagatassa gnana(the > ability of seeing the future) That's why he smiled & cried at the > birth of Siddhartha. he saw that siddartha will attain Buddha hood. > But he saw that he'll not be living to see it. > > > > Buddhas can see the past as far as it gets & Buddhas can see the > future Its not prediction. I've heard that in Thripitaka there's a > place where Lord Buddha had mentioned of great personalities who came > after his passing away, like king Ashoka,etc (any one know where > exactly it is ?) > > > > Don't take this as a all seeing & all hearing as with god. I'v > heard that, Only & only when he wishes to see some thing, he uses > the wisdom which is used to do it & it is reviled to him. > > > > Hope This Helps > > May u be well & happy > > With Metta > > Ram > -- 18352 From: nidive Date: Tue Dec 31, 2002 5:02am Subject: Re: Keeping Sila Hi James, > You write, `The supramundane path has the attributes > of jhana… Yet the supramundane path is not any jhana at all.' Oh, > this is really clear! ;-) It may look, taste, and smell like an > apple, but it really isn't an apple. Why? Because Neo says so. I think our understanding differs because of the Abhidhamma. Our understanding have to part here, I guess, since you aren't a fan of the Abhidhamma. By the way, have you eaten 'vegetarian meat'? Some of these food may look, taste and smell like meat, yet it is not meat. > Where is your support for this ridiculous assertion? You refer to > the `Visuddhimagga Maha Tika', for an pretty much unrelated point, > without proper citation, and frankly I have no clue what in the > heck that is. What is the `Visuddhimagga Maha Tika'? Why should > I believe it or know it? I am fairly sure many fairy tales and > scandalous stories have impressive Pali names also, should I > believe all of them? (And if this is some sort of obscure > reference, and you quote it knowing that I will not know what it > is, you are guilty of extreme conceit. Trying to outshine others > is quite unnecessary. We are trying to reach the truth here…not > be `know-it-alls') I am not sure if you had read "A Critical Analysis of the Jhanas" by Henepola. Those mumbo-jumbo are from there. I can e-mail you the PDF document if you want. It is about 1.4 megabytes. > Please Neo, I have more important things to do than to play > tit-for-tat when you don't provide proper citations or analysis. As far as I know, I am not playing tit-for-tat. But I admit I am negligent not to have informed you carefully of where those mumbo- jumbo came from. > I will ignore you from this point forward if you don't > substantiate your claims with proper research and logic. I apologise for causing much distress to you. Regards, NEO Swee Boon 18353 From: Date: Tue Dec 31, 2002 0:47am Subject: Re: [dsg] NEO of The Matrix (Was:Re: Dhamma Issues...etc.) Hi, James (and Sarah, Swee Boon, and all) - In a message dated 12/31/02 2:31:08 AM Eastern Standard Time, buddhatrue@y... writes: > > --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Sarah > wrote: > >Hi James, > > >===== > >* "When paññå has been developed to the degree that enlightenment > can be > >attained, lokuttara cittas, supramundane cittas experiencing > nibbÃ¥na > >arise. > >The magga-citta (path-consciousness), which is lokuttara kusala > citta, > >directly experiences nibbÃ¥na. When the magga-citta has fallen > away, it is > >immediately succeeded by its result, the phala-citta > >(fruition-consciousness), which is lokuttara vipÃ¥kacitta, also > >experiencing > >nibbÃ¥na. > > Hi Sarah, > > I absolutely, 100% disagree with this. I don't care if it is > written down, if you and NEO agree with it or not. The Buddha > specifically taught the opposite of these outlandish statements. No > cittas, supramundane or not, experience Nibbana. I have already > quoted extensively from the Buddha regarding this. Nibbana is not > and never could be an object of the mind. And I also think that you > have the wrong idea of what the aggregates are, but I am going to > drop it. You know too much to be told otherwise. I don't 'know' > anything, I only feel. Frankly, I am glad that I don't 'know' as > much as you and NEO. You seem to forget the heart. > > However, please don't presume to tell me what I feel. I know what I > feel. I feel the Buddha in all of those situations I described. I > am sorry you never have. > > Metta, James > > =============================== I have reservations as well with the idea of conditioned discernment taking the unconditioned as object. But that may in part be due to how one understands taking something as an object. Nibbana is an absence. We are, of course, able to observe absences, though that is possibly by means of comparison with the corresponding presences. Nibbana, of course, is an ultimate absence, an absence of all defilement and of all (separate) conditions - it is not nothing, but, being thoroughly uncondititoned, is without possibility of definitional circumscription. But there is the possibility of "pointing" to it, both lingistically and, I believe, observationally. In this latter regard, which relates to what you are discussing, James, about taking nibbana as an object of discernment (or not), a word that I like a lot is 'adumbration'. There is the following dictionary entry: **************************** Main Entry: ad·um·brate Pronunciation: 'a-d&m-"brAt, a-'d&m- Function: transitive verb Inflected Form(s): -brat·ed; -brat·ing Etymology: Latin adumbratus, past participle of adumbrare, from ad- + umbra shadow —more at UMBRAGE Date: 1581 1 : to foreshadow vaguely : INTIMATE 2 a : to give a sketchy representation or outline of b : to suggest or disclose partially 3 : OVERSHADOW, OBSCURE - ad·um·bra·tion /"a-(")d&m-'brA-sh&n/ noun - ad·um·bra·tive /a-'d&m-br&-tiv/ adjective - ad·um·bra·tive·ly adverb Pronunciation Key © 2001 by Merriam-Webster, Incorporated Merriam-Webster Privacy Policy ************************** I think that it is possible to obtain, even via our flawed, conditioned consciousness, an adumbration of nibbana, a kind of foreshadowing, seeing-from-a-distance of the unconditioned, and it may be this which is the content of path and fruit consciousnesses at least at levels lower than the arahant level. I have had two (differing) experiences which possibly, just possibly, are (quite low-level, quite mediocre) instances of kindergarten versions of this, and so I don't find the idea preposterous. The ultimate level of nibbanic discernment, it would seem to me, would be radically different from this, however, in that there would be no element of seeing from a distance. The ultimate apprehension of nibbana, it would seem to me, would be a nondual, timeless, being-event which falls beyond any possibility of real description. With metta, Howard P.S. Sarah isn't likely to be one who forgets the heart. Sometimes a dispassionate, analytical discussion might suggest that, but that would be a mistaken interpretation. /Thus is how ye shall see all this fleeting world: A star at dawn, a bubble in a stream, a flash of lightning in a summer cloud, a flickering lamp, a phantom, and a dream./ (From the Diamond Sutra) 18354 From: Robert Eddison Date: Tue Dec 31, 2002 6:54am Subject: Re: Yasodhara I've deleted the post to which I'm replying, but it's the one from Peter where he asked for a translation of the song sung by Yasodharaa upon the Buddha's return to Kapilavatthu. It consists of ten verses called the Narasiihagaathaa (Verses on the Lion of Men). It is found in the Apadaana Commentary (no English translation) and in the Jaatakanidaana, the introductory section of the Jaataka Commentary. There are two PTS translations of this: T.W. & C.A.F. Rhys Davids: _Buddhist Birth Stories, The Commentarial Introduction Entitled Nidaanakathaa_. London 1925. N.A. Jayawickrama: _The Story of Gotama Buddha (Jaatakanidaana)_. Oxford 1990. Note: Cowell's translation of the Jaataka will not be of any use here as it leaves out the Nidaanakathaa and gives only the birth stories and their verses. Below I append the Pali verses, though I regret I don't have time to provide a new translation, being presently up to my neck in more pedestrian translation work (mostly end-of-year financial reports of Icelandic fishing companies). NARASIIHAGAATHAA Siniddhaniilamuduku~ncitakeso, suuriyanimmalatalaabhinalaa.to. Yuttatun.gamudukaayatanaaso, ra.msijaalavitato narasiiho. Cakkavaran.kitarattasupaado, lakkha.nama.n.ditaaayatapa.nhi. Caamarihatthavibhuusitapa.nho, esa hi tuyha.m pitaa narasiiho. Sakyakumaaro varado sukhumaalo, lakkha.navicittapasannasariiro. Lokahitaaya aagato naraviiro, esa hi tuyha.m pitaa narasiiho. Aayatayuttasusa.n.thitasoto, gopakhumo abhiniilanetto. Indadhanuabhiniilabhamuko, esa hi tuyha.m pitaa narasiiho. Pu.n.nacandanibho mukhava.n.no, devanaraana.m piyo naranaago. Mattagajindavilaasitagaamii, esa hi tuyha.m pitaa narasiiho. Siniddhasugambhiirama~njusaghoso, hin.gulava.n.narattasujivho. Viisativiisatisetasudanto, esa hi tuyha.m pitaa narasiiho. Khattiyasambhavaaggakulindo, devamanussanamassitapaado. Siilasamaadhipati.t.thitacitto, esa hi tuyha.m pitaa narasiiho. Va.t.tasuva.t.tasusa.n.thitagiivo, siihahanumigaraajasariiro. Ka~ncanasucchaviuttamava.n.no, esa hi tuyha.m pitaa narasiiho. A~njanasamava.n.nasuniilakeso, ka~ncanapa.t.tavisuddhanalaa.to. Osadhipa.n.darasuddhasuu.n.no, esa hi tuyha.m pitaa narasiiho. Gacchantonilapathe viya cando, taaraaga.napariva.d.dhitaruupo. Saavakamajjhagato sama.nindo, esa hi tuyha.m pitaa narasiiho ti. Happy new year to all! Robert 18355 From: nina van gorkom Date: Tue Dec 31, 2002 7:06am Subject: Re: [dsg] Way 31, Comm, some remarks Hi Larry and all, op 30-12-2002 01:07 schreef LBIDD@w... op LBIDD@w...: > "The Way of Mindfulness" by Soma Thera > The Section of the Synopsis p.42 > http://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/bps/misc/wayof.html > > If, in the meditator's body, called the world, covetousness and grief > are abandoned, in the worlds of his feelings and so forth too, these are > abandoned owing to the earlier abandoning of these by the yogi > [kamañcettha kayasankhate loke abhijjha domanassam pahinam vedanadi > lokesu pi tam pahinameva pubbe pahinatta]. N: We have to return to a former part which I like: the body is the world because it crumbles. What is the world? What arises and falls away, sankhara dhammas. And see also the last line of this excerpt. As to: "owing to the earlier abandoning of these by the yogi", I was wondering. Is this, as we read earlier, vikkhambhana pahaana, abandoning by suppression in Samatha, by the jhana? Different from tadanga pahaana, abandoning by the opposites, by vipassana. Soma: Still, everywhere, the abandoning of the defilements has been stated by > way of the different types of persons and by way of the diversity of the > thought-unit, in which the development of the different subjects of the > Arousing of Mindfulness takes place [nana puggalavasena pana nana > cittakkhana satipatthana bhavanavasena ca sabbattha vuttam]. > [T] That is due to the fact that only the defilements which can arise in > the future are capable of being abandoned through the scorching out of > the causes by the attainment of the Path or through measures that make > the causes temporarily impotent, because of the observance of virtue and > the development of absorption. Past defilements and those arising in the > present are beyond the scope of abandoning. N: This is clear. Past is past already, the present has already arisen and then gone, so fast. Through the Path the latent tendencies are eradicated, so that defilements cannot arise in the future. Thus, I can understand that past or present defilements are not abandoned. Nina. 18356 From: James Date: Tue Dec 31, 2002 8:08am Subject: Dukkha and Illusion Sarah, Howard, NEO, all, Okay, Sarah, first of all, I am not in need of `rest'. Could you please stop writing that? I sleep at least six hours a day, everyday. Sometimes I sleep for long stretches; sometimes I break up the sleep into several sessions. I don't need a whole lot of sleep because the quality of my sleep is very good. I go to sleep immediately and rarely dream. Let's talk a little bit about `agitation'. Yes, I show a lot of agitation at times. Why? Because my very existence is agitation, so is everyone's who is unenlightened. That is the first Noble Truth: Life, all of it, is agitation, stress, and suffering. Now, I believe anyone who acts calm all of the time is simply keeping this agitation bottled up inside and being insincere. They may appear wise, but I think they are being `artificial' for the most part. I could go more into this but I won't right now. I am sure many people are pulling out a lot of sutta references to argue me. I am very agitated about that as well. Can't anyone think for himself or herself? The Buddha said many different things many different ways. He didn't proclaim `holy scripture'. And he wanted us all to think for ourselves. If the result is wrong thinking, so be it. A genuine wrong is better than a fake, forced right anytime; at least I believe so. Howard, you are quite correct. And I now see that at least one other person in this group truly follows the path (at least at some point) rather than just researches it or writes about it. You will understand what I write here. During deep meditation we discover our samsara existence: Which is a collection of `Vibrations'. We are all composed of vibrations of energy. One can experience a momentary `stop' of those vibrations, which isn't full nibbana, but a weak taste of it. The vibrations of thoughts, feels, consciousness, perception, and forms only knows that, for an instant, they ceased to exist because they stopped vibrating. It is a very unsettling, and very wonderful, experience. But, the vibrations don't `know' what happened during that cessation, they just know that it did happen. It is like this: these vibrations create a constant `film' that is taken as reality. Suddenly the mind `knows' that part of the film is missing! What was on that film? The mind has no clue of that; they only know that part is missing. To say that `supramundane' (a word far, too overused) cittas arise to `know' this cessation is ridiculous. Cittas are vibrations; Nibbana is the cessation of those vibrations. Cittas cannot possibly know nibbana. Keeping this in mind, the Buddha was Nibbana. He was not a collection of aggregates that were vibrating any longer. They had completely stopped. He had become his true nature, Nibbana. There was no difference between the Buddha and Nibbana. People who were around him knew this. Why did he appear the same way to most people? Why did his body exist in the same way but his mind was completely different? This was one of those things, I believe, he didn't want to teach directly (but he did indirectly). There is a strong possibility that our pile of aggregates not only create the illusion of self, they also create the illusion of samsara. In other words, the Buddha could be seen because he was part of the `film'. He had been born and had to live out a life according to the `script'. But he knew that none of it was real. He could have stepped out at any time. Metta, James 18357 From: peterdac4298 Date: Tue Dec 31, 2002 8:43am Subject: Re: Yasodhara Hi Robert Thanks for locating these verses. At least I am half way there to towards completion. Maybe I'll learn enough Pali at some opportune future time and have a go at it myself. Happy New Year Peter --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Robert Eddison wrote: > I've deleted the post to which I'm replying, but it's the one from Peter > where he asked for a translation of the song sung by Yasodharaa upon the > Buddha's return to Kapilavatthu. > > It consists of ten verses called the Narasiihagaathaa (Verses on the Lion > of Men). It is found in the Apadaana Commentary (no English translation) > and in the Jaatakanidaana, the introductory section of the Jaataka > Commentary. There are two PTS translations of this: > > T.W. & C.A.F. Rhys Davids: _Buddhist Birth Stories, The Commentarial > Introduction Entitled Nidaanakathaa_. London 1925. > > N.A. Jayawickrama: _The Story of Gotama Buddha (Jaatakanidaana)_. Oxford 1990. > > Note: Cowell's translation of the Jaataka will not be of any use here as it > leaves out the Nidaanakathaa and gives only the birth stories and their verses. > > Below I append the Pali verses, though I regret I don't have time to > provide a new translation, being presently up to my neck in more pedestrian > translation work (mostly end-of-year financial reports of Icelandic fishing > companies). > > NARASIIHAGAATHAA > > Siniddhaniilamuduku~ncitakeso, > suuriyanimmalatalaabhinalaa.to. > Yuttatun.gamudukaayatanaaso, > ra.msijaalavitato narasiiho. > > Cakkavaran.kitarattasupaado, > lakkha.nama.n.ditaaayatapa.nhi. > Caamarihatthavibhuusitapa.nho, > esa hi tuyha.m pitaa narasiiho. > > Sakyakumaaro varado sukhumaalo, > lakkha.navicittapasannasariiro. > Lokahitaaya aagato naraviiro, > esa hi tuyha.m pitaa narasiiho. > > Aayatayuttasusa.n.thitasoto, > gopakhumo abhiniilanetto. > Indadhanuabhiniilabhamuko, > esa hi tuyha.m pitaa narasiiho. > > Pu.n.nacandanibho mukhava.n.no, > devanaraana.m piyo naranaago. > Mattagajindavilaasitagaamii, > esa hi tuyha.m pitaa narasiiho. > > Siniddhasugambhiirama~njusaghoso, > hin.gulava.n.narattasujivho. > Viisativiisatisetasudanto, > esa hi tuyha.m pitaa narasiiho. > > Khattiyasambhavaaggakulindo, > devamanussanamassitapaado. > Siilasamaadhipati.t.thitacitto, > esa hi tuyha.m pitaa narasiiho. > > Va.t.tasuva.t.tasusa.n.thitagiivo, > siihahanumigaraajasariiro. > Ka~ncanasucchaviuttamava.n.no, > esa hi tuyha.m pitaa narasiiho. > > A~njanasamava.n.nasuniilakeso, > ka~ncanapa.t.tavisuddhanalaa.to. > Osadhipa.n.darasuddhasuu.n.no, > esa hi tuyha.m pitaa narasiiho. > > Gacchantonilapathe viya cando, > taaraaga.napariva.d.dhitaruupo. > Saavakamajjhagato sama.nindo, > esa hi tuyha.m pitaa narasiiho ti. > > > Happy new year to all! > > Robert 18358 From: nidive Date: Tue Dec 31, 2002 9:41am Subject: My Conclusions On Nibbana (Long) Hi James (if you care to listen - warning - contains Abhidhamma stuff), Sarah and Others who are interested, Earlier on, I said that I was convinced that nibbana cannot be described. After re-reading and re-ponderance, I regret to say that I remain unconvinced that nibbana cannot be described. I have considered Sutta Nipata V.6. http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/khuddaka/suttanipata/snp5- 06.html Upasiva: If he stays there, O All-around Eye, unaffected for many years, right there would he be cooled & released? Would his consciousness be like that? The Buddha: As a flame overthrown by the force of the wind goes to an end that cannot be classified, so the sage free from naming activity goes to an end that cannot be classified. The phrase "cannot be classified" was used as evidence that nibbana cannot be described or known. However, that very phrase was also attributed to a flame that has been snuffed out by the wind. The question arises as to whether a flame that has been snuffed out is equivalent to nibbana. Surely that is not the case. Therefore, as I understand it, the Buddha was not speaking about nibbana here. He was merely saying that something which does not exist anymore cannot be classified. Surely, a thing can only be classified only if it exists. If it does not exist, there is no way we can classify it. Thus, a flame that has gone out cannot be classified. Thus, an arahant cannot be classified simply because the arahant does not exist anymore (after passing away, death being unavoidable). It is simply impossible for a flame that has gone out to regain its brilliance. The flame does not exist anymore. Upasiva: He who has reached the end: Does he not exist, or is he for eternity free from dis-ease? Please, sage, declare this to me as this phenomenon has been known by you. The Buddha: One who has reached the end has no criterion by which anyone would say that -- for him it doesn't exist. When all phenomena are done away with, all means of speaking are done away with as well. It is impossible for that which is non-existent to ask or to think: 'Do I exist?' or 'Do I not exist'?. It is complicating that which is non-complicated. Therefore, it is impossible to describe something which does not exist anymore. It is impossible that a flame which does not exist anymore could be described. Even so, it is impossible to describe the Tathagata or an arahant. However, nibbana can be described. The reason being that nibbana exists; as compared to the Tathagata who no longer exists anymore, just like a flame which is snuffed out and no longer existing cannot be described. "Released from clinging to form, feeling, perception, mental formations and consciousness is the Enlightened One, mighty, deep unfathomable as the great ocean." Indeed, the above sutta quote says directly that the Tathagata cannot be described. This concurs with my understanding. I have also considered Samyutta Nikaya XXXV.23 http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/samyutta/sn35-023.html "Monks, I will teach you the All. Listen & pay close attention. I will speak." "As you say, lord," the monks responded. The Blessed One said, "What is the All? Simply the eye & forms, ear & sounds, nose & aromas, tongue & flavors, body & tactile sensations, intellect & ideas. This, monks, is called the All. Anyone who would say, 'Repudiating this All, I will describe another,' if questioned on what exactly might be the grounds for his statement, would be unable to explain, and furthermore, would be put to grief. Why? Because it lies beyond range." The note accompanying the HTML link says: ... the Commentary includes nibbana (unbinding) within the scope of the All described here -- as a dhamma, or object of the intellect ... As I understand it, the Commentary is correct to say that the All includes nibbana as the object of the intellect. The four ultimate dhammas in the Abhidhamma are: rupa, citta, cetasika and nibbana. Each citta always takes an object and nibbana can be the object of a citta. Therefore, 'intellect & ideas' would include nibbana. For it is by means of cittas that nibbana is known. As I understand it, what the Buddha was driving at here was this: Is there anything beyond the four 'ultimate realities' of rupa, citta, cetasika and nibbana? Clearly, if there is anything beyond the four 'ultimate realities', it would lie beyond range. There is therefore no ground for the statement "Repudiating this All, I will describe another.". A person who says so will be unable to explain what lies beyond the four 'ultimate realities' and would be put to grief. This brings us to AN III.32 "This is peace, this is exquisite -- the resolution of all fabrications, the relinquishment of all acquisitions, the ending of craving; dispassion; cessation; Nibbana." As I understand it, AN III.32 was clearly an attempt by the Buddha to describe nibbana. (Some may disagree. But my counter-question would be: Even if a pseudo-description by the Buddha was made, is that not an attempt at describing? For if describing nibbana would put the Buddha to grief, would he even attempt to describe nibbana?) As I understand it, the Buddha was able to explain what was described (nibbana) and he was not put to grief. Now, let's turn our attention to the standard descriptions given by the Buddha about arahants and about nibbana. The standard description given about arahants is: "Released from clinging to form, feeling, perception, mental formations and consciousness is the Enlightened One, mighty, deep unfathomable as the great ocean." An elaborate and standard description comparing an arahant with that of fire or flame is given: http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/majjhima/mn072.html "And suppose someone were to ask you, Vaccha, 'This fire burning in front of you, dependent on what is it burning?' Thus asked, how would you reply?" "...I would reply, 'This fire burning in front of me is burning dependent on grass & timber as its sustenance.'" "If the fire burning in front of you were to go out, would you know that, 'This fire burning in front of me has gone out'?" "...yes..." "And suppose someone were to ask you, 'This fire that has gone out in front of you, in which direction from here has it gone? East? West? North? Or south?' Thus asked, how would you reply?" "That doesn't apply, Master Gotama. Any fire burning dependent on a sustenance of grass and timber, being unnourished -- from having consumed that sustenance and not being offered any other -- is classified simply as 'out' (unbound)." "Even so, Vaccha, any physical form by which one describing the Tathagata would describe him: That the Tathagata has abandoned, its root destroyed, like an uprooted palm tree, deprived of the conditions of existence, not destined for future arising. Freed from the classification of form, Vaccha, the Tathagata is deep, boundless, hard to fathom, like the sea. 'Reappears' doesn't apply. 'Does not reappear' doesn't apply. 'Both does & does not reappear' doesn't apply. 'Neither reappears nor does not reappear' doesn't apply. "Any feeling... Any perception... Any mental fabrication... "Any consciousness by which one describing the Tathagata would describe him: That the Tathagata has abandoned, its root destroyed, like an uprooted palm tree, deprived of the conditions of existence, not destined for future arising. Freed from the classification of consciousness, Vaccha, the Tathagata is deep, boundless, hard to fathom, like the sea. 'Reappears' doesn't apply. 'Does not reappear' doesn't apply. 'Both does & does not reappear' doesn't apply. 'Neither reappears nor does not reappear' doesn't apply." The standard descriptions given about nibbana is: "This is peace, this is exquisite -- the resolution of all fabrications, the relinquishment of all acquisitions, the ending of craving; dispassion; cessation; Nibbana." -- AN III.32 "There is that dimension where there is neither earth, nor water, nor fire, nor wind; neither dimension of the infinitude of space, nor dimension of the infinitude of consciousness, nor dimension of nothingness, nor dimension of neither perception nor non-perception; neither this world, nor the next world, nor sun, nor moon. And there, I say, there is neither coming, nor going, nor stasis; neither passing away nor arising: without stance, without foundation, without support [mental object]. This, just this, is the end of stress." -- Ud VIII.1 "There is, monks, an unborn -- unbecome -- unmade -- unfabricated. If there were not that unborn -- unbecome -- unmade -- unfabricated, there would not be the case that emancipation from the born -- become -- made -- fabricated would be discerned. But precisely because there is an unborn -- unbecome -- unmade -- unfabricated, emancipation from the born -- become -- made -- fabricated is discerned." -- Ud VIII.3 These descriptions which I pointed out makes it very clear that an arahant and nibbana are separate entities. The Buddha had never described nibbana as "mighty, deep unfathomable as the great ocean". Such a description only applies to an arahant. Similarly, the Buddha had never described arahants as "peace, exquisite or the dimension where there is neither coming, nor going, nor stasis, etc...". Such a description only applies to nibbana. The Buddha made it very clear that arahants and nibbana are different entities. Arahants are indescribable by virtue of their non-existence (after passing away). Nibbana is describable by virtue of its existence as an 'ultimate reality'. The Buddha would not expound a teaching that is confusing. Arahants are arahants. Nibbana is nibbana. As I understand it, confusion is clearly not the style of teaching of the Buddha. I have also considered Samyutta Nikaya XXXV.24 http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/samyutta/sn35-024.html "Monks, I will teach you the All as a phenomenon for abandoning. Listen & pay close attention. I will speak." "As you say, lord," the monks responded. The Blessed One said, "And which All is a phenomenon for abandoning? to be abandoned? The eye is to be abandoned. Forms are to be abandoned. Consciousness at the eye is to be abandoned. Contact at the eye is to be abandoned. And whatever there is that arises in dependence on contact at the eye -- experienced as pleasure, pain or neither-pleasure-nor-pain -- that too is to be abandoned. "The ear is to be abandoned. Sounds are to be abandoned... "The nose is to be abandoned. Aromas are to be abandoned... "The tongue is to be abandoned. Flavors are to be abandoned... "The body is to be abandoned. Tactile sensations are to be abandoned... "The intellect is to be abandoned. Ideas are to be abandoned. Consciousness at the intellect is to be abandoned. Contact at the intellect is to be abandoned. And whatever there is that arises in dependence on contact at the intellect -- experienced as pleasure, pain or neither-pleasure-nor-pain -- that too is to be abandoned. "This is called the All as a phenomenon for abandoning." Earlier on I have said that the All includes nibbana. But why should one abandon nibbana? Indeed, why should one not abandon nibbana? Would one who has laid down the burden (arahant) say: "I would not let go of nibbana."? Clearly not, for that is a burden in itself. One who has laid down the burden would have seen the four 'ultimate realities' as they are. He knows what is Conditioned and what is Unconditioned. Having rightly penetrated what is Conditioned and what is Unconditioned, at death, he goes to an end that cannot be classified by virtue of being non-existent. As I understand it, an arahant who had died does not 'enter nibbana', nor is the five aggregates 'replaced' with nibbana. An arahant is not nibbana. Nibbana remains as it is. But as for the arahant, by virtue of being non-existent (five aggregates extinguished), there can be no classification. When all phenomena are done away with, all means of speaking are done away with as well. Indeed, for an arahant who had passed away, even the 'ultimate reality' of nibbana is done away with. For all has been seen as they are. This stanza also shows that the Buddha was able to describe nibbana by virtue of nibbana being a phenomena (which is unconditioned yet an 'ultimate reality'). If nibbana were not a phenomena, there would be no case for the Buddha to provide a description of it (or even attempt to provide a pseudo-description). http://www.abhidhamma.org/abhid18.html 'Might there be another way also, revered sir, according to which it suffices to say, 'The monk is skilled in the elements'?' 'There might be, Ananda. There are these two elements, Ananda: the element that is constructed and the element that is unconstructed. When, Ananda, he knows and sees these two elements, it is at this stage that it suffices to say, 'The monk is skilled in the element. My conclusion is that nibbana is to be known and seen as it is. When nibbana is known and seen as it is, at death, the arahant goes to an end that cannot be classified by virtue of being non-existent. An arahant is not nibbana. Regards, NEO Swee Boon 18359 From: James Date: Tue Dec 31, 2002 10:42am Subject: Re: My Conclusions On Nibbana (Long) --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "nidive " wrote: > Hi James (if you care to listen - warning - contains Abhidhamma > stuff), Sarah and Others who are interested, Hi NEO, Okay, this is a much better analysis with understandable support. I see where you are coming from, to some extent. I am not going to go into all the details of this post; I just want to look at your main argument. Your main argument is that an arahant can't be described, but Nibbana can be described to some extent. Therefore, an arahant isn't nibbana. The main sticking point we have is the death of the arahant. What happens at that point? What is the difference between an arahant alive and an arahant dead? What is the difference between nibbana and parinibbana (total unbinding)? If an arahant is free from the five aggregates, what could the arahant be still bound to? I believe that the arahant is still bound by samsara, but is actually nibbana. To explain, let's look at the last moments of the Buddha's death. It is described as such: Then the Blessed One addressed the monks, "Now, then, monks, I exhort you: All fabrications are subject to decay. Bring about completion by being heedful." Those were the Tathagata's last words. Then the Blessed One entered the first jhana. Emerging from that he entered the second jhana. Emerging from that, he entered the third... the fourth jhana... the dimension of the infinitude of space... the dimension of the infinitude of consciousness... the dimension of nothingness... the dimension of neither perception nor non-perception. Emerging from that, he entered the cessation of perception & feeling. Then Ven. Ananda said to Ven. Anuruddha, "Ven. Anuruddha,[8] the Blessed One is totally unbound." "No, friend Ananda. The Blessed One isn't totally unbound. He has entered the cessation of perception & feeling." Then the Blessed One, emerging from the cessation of perception & feeling, entered the dimension of neither perception nor non- perception. Emerging from that, he entered the dimension of nothingness... the dimension of the infinitude of consciousness... the dimension of the infinitude of space... the fourth jhana... the third... the second... the first jhana. Emerging from the first jhana he entered the second... the third... the fourth jhana. Emerging from the fourth jhana, he immediately was totally Unbound." NEO, I won't presume to know what all of these stages are. They are really only knowable to the arahant. But, I want you to look particularly at the last part of this selection, before the Buddha was totally Unbound. First he goes through the jhanas in the order of highest release, 1 to 4, then he enters `dimensions' of neither percpection, non-perception, etc. At this point, Ven. Ananda thinks he must be totally unbound, but that is not the case. From this highest level, he then goes back through the Jhanas from the highest to the lowest, from 4 to 1, then he immediately goes back from the lowest to the highest, from 1 to 4…..then he is totally unbound. Why did he do this? I believe it is because he needed to release the `illusion of samsara'; the illusion that others project onto him as `a self'. Then, and only then, he could completely leave the samsara existence. Why this order of jhana? Think of samsara as like gravity. First he has to get to the point outside of the effect of gravity, then he re-enters gravity with the quality of having no-gravity, this negates the law of gravity as he goes to the highest level of release again without the effect of gravity (samsara). Then he is finally, completely unbound. The Buddha was Nibbana, but `he' (which really isn't `he') was subsisting in a non-nibbana realm. He was an anomaly. He had to leave the effect of that realm, re-enter it to negate that existence, and then he would be completely unbound. Samsara is also referred to as the `Jeweled Net of Indra'. We are each like jewels connected to each other, but we are separated by a net or web. When the Buddha achieved enlightenment, he wasn't a part of the web any longer, but the web still had his `spot' existing. He had to close this `spot' by showing to all that he really didn't exist any longer. Then he was completely unbound because `his spot' was closed. Of course I could be mistaken about this interpretation. The sutta provides no explanation and there aren't footnotes either. My explanation could be plausible, or it couldn't. We are more connected than we often assume. Metta, James 18360 From: Date: Tue Dec 31, 2002 6:03am Subject: Re: [dsg] My Conclusions On Nibbana (Long) Hi, Swee Boon - In a message dated 12/31/02 12:43:02 PM Eastern Standard Time, nidive@y... writes: > > I have also considered Samyutta Nikaya XXXV.23 > > http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/samyutta/sn35-023.html > > "Monks, I will teach you the All. Listen &pay close attention. I > will speak." > > "As you say, lord," the monks responded. > > The Blessed One said, "What is the All? Simply the eye &forms, ear > &sounds, nose &aromas, tongue &flavors, body &tactile > sensations, intellect &ideas. This, monks, is called the All. > Anyone who would say, 'Repudiating this All, I will describe > another,' if questioned on what exactly might be the grounds for his > statement, would be unable to explain, and furthermore, would be put > to grief. Why? Because it lies beyond range." > > The note accompanying the HTML link says: > > ... the Commentary includes nibbana (unbinding) within the scope of > the All described here -- as a dhamma, or object of the intellect ... > > As I understand it, the Commentary is correct to say that the All > includes nibbana as the object of the intellect. > > The four ultimate dhammas in the Abhidhamma are: rupa, citta, > cetasika and nibbana. Each citta always takes an object and nibbana > can be the object of a citta. Therefore, 'intellect &ideas' would > include nibbana. For it is by means of cittas that nibbana is known. > > As I understand it, what the Buddha was driving at here was this: Is > there anything beyond the four 'ultimate realities' of rupa, citta, > cetasika and nibbana? > =========================== I find the foregoing to be not only a stretch, but a contortion. ;-) It seems to me that both the commentary and you are making Herculean efforts on behalf of Abhidhamma here, but it just does not fit. The sutta, The All, it seems to me is very clear, and it does *not* include nibbana within its purview. Nibbana is not to be found within any of the items listed, including "intellect & ideas." Nibbana is not an idea. There may well be idea(s) of nibbana, but not one of them *is* nibbana. Nibbana is that absence which is the end of dukkha, the end of the three poisons. Included within nibbana is the end of thinking or feeling or suspecting that there is anything beyond the all. It is a complete and total giving up, throwing back, and release. (And none of what I write here is anything more than an inadequate "pointing to", and not a definition.) With metta, Howard /Thus is how ye shall see all this fleeting world: A star at dawn, a bubble in a stream, a flash of lightning in a summer cloud, a flickering lamp, a phantom, and a dream./ (From the Diamond Sutra) 18361 From: phamdluan2000 Date: Tue Dec 31, 2002 11:51am Subject: Re: My Conclusions On Nibbana (Long) --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "James " wrote: < snip > To explain, let's look at the last moments of the Buddha's death. It is described as such: Then the Blessed One addressed the monks, "Now, then, monks, I exhort you: All fabrications are subject to decay. Bring about completion by being heedful." Those were the Tathagata's last words. Then the Blessed One entered the first jhana. Emerging from that he entered the second jhana. Emerging from that, he entered the third... the fourth jhana... the dimension of the infinitude of space... the dimension of the infinitude of consciousness... the dimension of nothingness... the dimension of neither perception nor non-perception. Emerging from that, he entered the cessation of perception & feeling. Then Ven. Ananda said to Ven. Anuruddha, "Ven. Anuruddha,[8] the Blessed One is totally unbound." "No, friend Ananda. The Blessed One isn't totally unbound. He has entered the cessation of perception & feeling." Then the Blessed One, emerging from the cessation of perception & feeling, entered the dimension of neither perception nor non- perception. Emerging from that, he entered the dimension of nothingness... the dimension of the infinitude of consciousness... the dimension of the infinitude of space... the fourth jhana... the third... the second... the first jhana. Emerging from the first jhana he entered the second... the third... the fourth jhana. Emerging from the fourth jhana, he immediately was totally Unbound." KKT: I always question this story about the last moment of the Buddha. Because the Buddha didn't describe His inner states at that moment, how did others know that He had passed by such and such states of Jhana? KKT 18362 From: James Date: Tue Dec 31, 2002 0:21pm Subject: Re: My Conclusions On Nibbana (Long) --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "phamdluan2000 " wrote: > KKT: I always question this story > about the last moment of the Buddha. > > Because the Buddha didn't describe > His inner states at that moment, > how did others know that He had passed > by such and such states of Jhana? > > > KKT Hi KKT, Good issue to bring up because it further supports my point. ;-) Ananda, at the time of the death of the Buddha, was still stuck in Samsara as an unenlightened being; he was connected to all of the `jewels' in the `Jeweled Net of Indra', and Ven. Ananda could see a lot, but not much past that `web of connection'. What he saw as reality wasn't really reality. That is why Ven. Anuruddha, who was enlightened at the time, had to set him straight at this momentous moment. Ven. Ananda knew some things, but not everything. For example, I am not enlightened, like Ven. Ananda was at that time; but because I know that I am connected to everyone, I often know many things about others… usually to their surprise…but not everything. (Actually, sometimes I am connected so much I wish I wasn't connected! The connections are hard to break for one who rushes the process like I am doing presently. Many people in this group, practically everyone actually, is connecting to me in a way that is overwhelming for me. Please stop. Give me some time. You all know what I mean. ;-). Love, James ps. KKT, you already know this and are like this. You just wanted confirmation. This post may get me in trouble with 'the powers that be.' ;-) I don't care, it won't be the first time!! ;-) 18363 From: Ray Hendrickson Date: Tue Dec 31, 2002 0:48pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Happy New Year and No Need to Agree..... Happy New Year Sarah. Thanks very much for the great link in your 'NUM-looking at the moon on a cloudy night' message above. I hope you keep us posted on when the book comes out. I also wanted to thank all those on the list for their great posts. And I especially want to thank Sarah and Jon for all the work you put into the list. Happy New Year everyone............................... Gassho Ray "And what is meant by admirable friendship? There is the case where a lay person, in whatever town or village he may dwell, spends time with householders or householders' sons, young or old, who are advanced in virtue. He talks with them, engages them in discussions. He emulates consummate conviction in those who are consummate in conviction, consummate virtue in those who are consummate in virtue, consummate generosity in those who are consummate in generosity, and consummate discernment in those who are consummate in discernment. This is called admirable friendship. " "When a monk has admirable friends, admirable companions, admirable comrades, it is to be expected that he will get to hear at will, easily & without difficulty, talk that is truly sobering and conducive to the opening of awareness, i.e., talk on modesty, on contentment, on seclusion, on non-entanglement, on arousing persistence, on virtue, on concentration, on discernment, on release, and on the knowledge & vision of release" ----- Original Message ----- From: "Sarah" To: Sent: Tuesday, December 31, 2002 12:45 AM Subject: [dsg] Happy New Year and No Need to Agree..... > Hi James, > > --- "James " wrote: > > > Hi Sarah, > > > > I absolutely, 100% disagree with this. > ..... > No problem....we don't need to agree and I probably came in with the wrong > words at the wrong time, even though I meant well. There will be plenty of > others who also agree with your points in this regard and be glad to hear > your spirited defence of them anytime. > > I apologise for any offence caused with any 'unfeeling' comments. Get some > rest so that you can enjoy the New Year tonight;-)Must be pretty close for > Rob K in New Zealand.... > > Happy New Year to everyone else too. > > metta, > > Sarah > ====== 18364 From: Kom Tukovinit Date: Tue Dec 31, 2002 1:29pm Subject: Re: [dsg] My Conclusions On Nibbana (Long) Dear Howard, Sorry for butting in, but I am puzzled by your post in regard to this particular sutta (perhaps the response was more in the context of Swee Boon's entire post in general). > -----Original Message----- > From: upasaka@a... [mailto:upasaka@a...] > > > (Swee Boon:) > > I have also considered Samyutta Nikaya XXXV.23 > > > > http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/samyutta/sn35-023.html > > > > "Monks, I will teach you the All. Listen &pay close attention. I > > will speak." > > > > "As you say, lord," the monks responded. > > > > ... > > > > The note accompanying the HTML link says: > > > > ... the Commentary includes nibbana (unbinding) within the scope of > > the All described here -- as a dhamma, or object of the intellect ... > > > > As I understand it, the Commentary is correct to say that the All > > includes nibbana as the object of the intellect. > > > > The four ultimate dhammas in the Abhidhamma are: rupa, citta, > > cetasika and nibbana. Each citta always takes an object and nibbana > > can be the object of a citta. Therefore, 'intellect &ideas' would > > include nibbana. For it is by means of cittas that nibbana is known. > > > > As I understand it, what the Buddha was driving at here was this: Is > > there anything beyond the four 'ultimate realities' of rupa, citta, > > cetasika and nibbana? > > > =========================== > I find the foregoing to be not only a stretch, but a > contortion. ;-) > It seems to me that both the commentary and you are making > Herculean > efforts on behalf of Abhidhamma here, but it just does not fit. > The sutta, > The All, it seems to me is very clear, and it does *not* include nibbana > within its purview. Nibbana is not to be found within any of the items > listed, including "intellect & ideas." Nibbana is not an idea. As far as I understand it, the Buddha simply says in this sutta that if somebody is calling/referring to (naming, making pannatti) something that is real, it must refer to one of the 12 things he enumerated. For someone to come up with something else (that doesn't refer to the 12 things), the person will have nothing to back it up with. The commentaries simply says that in this sutta, the Sabba (the All) refers to the Ayatana 12, which is corroborated by the typical enumeration that refers to the Ayatana 12. It also explains that because there is no realities that the Buddha doesn't penetrate, it is impossible for anybody to come up with something that is real that the Buddha doesn't already know and teach. I personally think the use of the words "intellect & ideas" are misleading translations. Intellect in this case refers to Manayatana => (Abhidhamma) all the cittas except the previous 5. Ideas => Dhammayatana => (Abhidhamma) all other types of rupas not included in the previous 7, the cetasikas, and nibbana On what ground (in this sutta) do you object including Nibbana as part of the all? Is it because of the words, the contexts, or is it because what you understand the 12 ayatanas to be (that doesn't include nibbana), or is it something else? kom 18365 From: Date: Tue Dec 31, 2002 8:52am Subject: Re: [dsg] My Conclusions On Nibbana (Long) Hi again, Swee Boon - In a message dated 12/31/02 2:05:15 PM Eastern Standard Time, upasaka@a... writes: > I find the foregoing to be not only a stretch, but a contortion. ;-) > It seems to me that both the commentary and you are making Herculean > efforts on behalf of Abhidhamma here, but it just does not fit. The sutta, > The All, it seems to me is very clear, and it does *not* include nibbana > within its purview. Nibbana is not to be found within any of the items > listed, including "intellect &ideas." Nibbana is not an idea. There may > well > be idea(s) of nibbana, but not one of them *is* nibbana. Nibbana is that > absence which is the end of dukkha, the end of the three poisons. Included > within nibbana is the end of thinking or feeling or suspecting that there > is > anything beyond the all. It is a complete and total giving up, throwing > back, > and release. (And none of what I write here is anything more than an > inadequate "pointing to", and not a definition.) > ========================== An additional thought has occurred to me which I'd like to mention. The great hero of Mahayana, Nagarjuna, whom David Kalupahana, the Theravadin scholar actually suggests might well have been Theravadin, taught that nibbana is not different from samsara, that fundamentally there isn't an iota of difference between them. Most Theravadins and many Mahayanists are perplexed by this cryptic claim. If the 12 pairs, together, are, indeed, as the sutta "The All" states, all that there is, yet they are all conditioned and nibbana is the unconditioned (so that nibbana cannot, as I said, be among them) then there would appear to be an outright contradiction. The solution, it would seem to me, is Nagarjuna's solution. Nibbana is the way things actually are, and it is the way they appear when the three poisons are fully uprooted and there is no distortion. Samsara is the way things appear under the yoke of afflictions, under the spell of ignorance and the slavery of craving and aversion. My sense of what the what the dawning of enlightenment must be like is that of an incredibly astounding "aha! moment" in which blinders are removed and the reality seen is so surprising, so marvelous, so completely inexpressible, and the deliverance obtained so complete, that one doesn't know whether to laugh or cry, and typically does both! With metta, Howard /Thus is how ye shall see all this fleeting world: A star at dawn, a bubble in a stream, a flash of lightning in a summer cloud, a flickering lamp, a phantom, and a dream./ (From the Diamond Sutra) 18366 From: Date: Tue Dec 31, 2002 9:00am Subject: Re: [dsg] My Conclusions On Nibbana (Long) Hi, Kom - With regard to the following, I just sent off a follow-up post to my previous one that may go a long way in answering what you ask here. BTW, let me take the opportunity here to correct something I wrote in that follow-up post: I wrote of "the 12 pairs", but, of course, I should have said either "the 12 ayatanas" or the "6 pairs". (And I call myself a mathematician!! ;-)) With metta, Howard In a message dated 12/31/02 4:31:44 PM Eastern Standard Time, kom@a... writes: > Dear Howard, > > Sorry for butting in, but I am puzzled by your post in regard to this > particular sutta (perhaps the response was more in the context of Swee > Boon's entire post in general). > > > >-----Original Message----- > >From: upasaka@a... [mailto:upasaka@a...] > > > >>(Swee Boon:) > >>I have also considered Samyutta Nikaya XXXV.23 > >> > >>http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/samyutta/sn35-023.html > >> > >>"Monks, I will teach you the All. Listen &pay close attention. I > >>will speak." > >> > >>"As you say, lord," the monks responded. > >> > >>... > >> > >>The note accompanying the HTML link says: > >> > >>... the Commentary includes nibbana (unbinding) within the scope of > >>the All described here -- as a dhamma, or object of the intellect ... > >> > >>As I understand it, the Commentary is correct to say that the All > >>includes nibbana as the object of the intellect. > >> > >>The four ultimate dhammas in the Abhidhamma are: rupa, citta, > >>cetasika and nibbana. Each citta always takes an object and nibbana > >>can be the object of a citta. Therefore, 'intellect &ideas' would > >>include nibbana. For it is by means of cittas that nibbana is known. > >> > >>As I understand it, what the Buddha was driving at here was this: Is > >>there anything beyond the four 'ultimate realities' of rupa, citta, > >>cetasika and nibbana? > >> > >=========================== > > I find the foregoing to be not only a stretch, but a > >contortion. ;-) > > It seems to me that both the commentary and you are making > >Herculean > >efforts on behalf of Abhidhamma here, but it just does not fit. > >The sutta, > >The All, it seems to me is very clear, and it does *not* include nibbana > >within its purview. Nibbana is not to be found within any of the items > >listed, including "intellect &ideas." Nibbana is not an idea. > > As far as I understand it, the Buddha simply says in this sutta that if > somebody is calling/referring to (naming, making pannatti) something that > is > real, it must refer to one of the 12 things he enumerated. For someone to > come up with something else (that doesn't refer to the 12 things), the > person will have nothing to back it up with. > > The commentaries simply says that in this sutta, the Sabba (the All) refers > to the Ayatana 12, which is corroborated by the typical enumeration that > refers to the Ayatana 12. It also explains that because there is no > realities that the Buddha doesn't penetrate, it is impossible for anybody > to > come up with something that is real that the Buddha doesn't already know > and > teach. > > I personally think the use of the words "intellect &ideas" are misleading > translations. > Intellect in this case refers to Manayatana => (Abhidhamma) all the cittas > except the previous 5. > Ideas => Dhammayatana => (Abhidhamma) all other types of rupas not included > in the previous 7, the cetasikas, and nibbana > > On what ground (in this sutta) do you object including Nibbana as part of > the all? Is it because of the words, the contexts, or is it because what > you understand the 12 ayatanas to be (that doesn't include nibbana), or is > it something else? > > kom > > /Thus is how ye shall see all this fleeting world: A star at dawn, a bubble in a stream, a flash of lightning in a summer cloud, a flickering lamp, a phantom, and a dream./ (From the Diamond Sutra) 18367 From: christine_forsyth Date: Tue Dec 31, 2002 2:13pm Subject: Re: My Conclusions On Nibbana (Long) Hi KKT,and all, The Buddha had previously mentioned that Ven. Anuruddha (foremost among many others) possessed an abhinna called the divine eye. The divine eye is a mundane (lokiya) power and does not need the attainment of Arahatship. In Chapter III 14. Dhatusamyutta 'Connected Discourses on Elements' II. The Second Subchapter (Seven Elements) 15 (5) Walking Back and Forth p638-9 (Bhikkhu Bodhi) excerpt: 'Do you see Anuruddha walking back and forth with a number of bhikkhus?' 'Yes, venerable sir.' 'All those bhikkhus possess the divine eye.' In "Great Disciples of the Buddha" (Nyanaponika Thera and Hellmuth Hecker) chapter on "Anuruddha: Master of the Divine Eye", p.191 on Anuruddha's Spiritual Path, it says: 'The divine eye (dibbacakkhu) is so called because it is similar to the vision of the devas, which is capable of seeing objects at remote distances, behind barriers, and in different dimensions of existence. The divine eye is developed by meditative power. It is not a distinct sense organ but a type of knowledge, yet a knowledge that exercises an ocular function. This faculty is aroused on the basis of the fourth jhana, and specifically through one of the meditative supports called the light kasina or the fire kasina, a visualized circle of light or fire. <> The characteristic function of the divine eye, according to the texts, is the knowledge of the passing away and rebirth of beings (cutupapata-nana). This knowledge was achieved by the Buddha on the night of his own Enlightenment and was always included by him in the complex step-by-step gradual training, where it appears as the second of the three true knowledges (tevijja, see, for example, MN 27) and the fourth of the six superknowledges (challabhinna, see MN 6).' http://www.budsas.org/ebud/bud-dict/dic_idx.htm See entry under 'abhiññá' metta, Christine --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "phamdluan2000 " wrote: > KKT: I always question this story > about the last moment of the Buddha. > > Because the Buddha didn't describe > His inner states at that moment, > how did others know that He had passed > by such and such states of Jhana? > > > KKT 18368 From: Kom Tukovinit Date: Tue Dec 31, 2002 2:25pm Subject: RE: [dsg] My Conclusions On Nibbana (Long) Dear Howard, Thanks for replying. You objected on the ground that Ayatana 12 don't include any unconditioned reality (nibbana). This is definitely a position that Abhiddhamma doesn't take. I guess we will have to find other evidence in the sutta / vinaya. kom > -----Original Message----- > From: upasaka@a... [mailto:upasaka@a...] > Sent: Tuesday, December 31, 2002 2:00 PM > To: dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com > Subject: Re: [dsg] My Conclusions On Nibbana (Long) > > > > > > On what ground (in this sutta) do you object including Nibbana > as part of > > the all? Is it because of the words, the contexts, or is it > because what > > you understand the 12 ayatanas to be (that doesn't include > nibbana), or is > > it something else? > > > > kom > > 18369 From: peterdac4298 Date: Tue Dec 31, 2002 2:35pm Subject: Re: Way 31, Comm, some remarks --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, nina van gorkom wrote: > Hi Larry and all, > N: This is clear. Past is past already, the present has already arisen and > then gone, so fast. Through the Path the latent tendencies are eradicated, > so that defilements cannot arise in the future. Thus, I can understand that > past or present defilements are not abandoned. > Nina. Hi Nina So, presumably, the goal of the holy life is to realize this with total clarity, at all times, without any trace of doubt or confusion? Cheers Peter 18370 From: Date: Tue Dec 31, 2002 2:51pm Subject: RE: RE: [dsg] Re: Anatta - View of some scholars Hi Kom, You wrote: "On the other hand, if I were to come from a point where I think nibbana is an unconditioned consciousness, then it would be easy for me to think that with all the conditioned consciousness stripped out, what remains is the true self, even if it might not be a distinct self. Don't you think?" L: Yes, I agree. Someone asked the Buddha if consciousness is the self and he said no. As far as I know, no one asked about an unconditioned consciousness. Perhaps someone could argue from a position of yogic insight that there is an unconditioned consciousness and because it is unconditioned it satisfies the basic requirements of "self" in being not impermanent, reliable and good (sat, chit, ananda). However, even though this yogin would argue there is an unconditioned consciousness and it is self, I don't think he would say this unconditioned consciousness is nibbana. IMO nibbana is the end of belief in a self. Saying "the end of belief in a self" is the "true self" or is not self doesn't make sense, either way. Incidentally, since the Buddha divided reality into khandhas and nibbana, I think it is reasonable to assume he didn't see an unconditioned consciousness. However, I think the idea of such a thing could be used in such a way as to end the belief in a self and this would not be incompatible with satipatthana. But it would take some very high level experimentation to test such a theory. Larry 18371 From: rjkjp1 Date: Tue Dec 31, 2002 3:06pm Subject: Re: My Conclusions On Nibbana (Long) --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "phamdluan2000 <> > > KKT: I always question this story > about the last moment of the Buddha. > > Because the Buddha didn't describe > His inner states at that moment, > how did others know that He had passed > by such and such states of Jhana? >______________ Dear KKT, As Christine mentioned according to the texts it was venerable Anuruddha who narrated the last moments. He was chief among those monks who have such powers but there were also many others who could have known this matter. According to commentaries such types of arahants, existed for about 1000 years after the Buddhas parinibbana. Robertk 18372 From: phamdluan2000 Date: Tue Dec 31, 2002 3:27pm Subject: Re: My Conclusions On Nibbana (Long) Dear Christine & Robert, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "rjkjp1 " wrote: > > > KKT: I always question this story > about the last moment of the Buddha. > > Because the Buddha didn't describe > His inner states at that moment, > how did others know that He had passed > by such and such states of Jhana? >______________ Dear KKT, As Christine mentioned according to the texts it was venerable Anuruddha who narrated the last moments. He was chief among those monks who have such powers but there were also many others who could have known this matter. According to commentaries such types of arahants, existed for about 1000 years after the Buddhas parinibbana. Robertk KKT: Thank you for this info. BTW, do you think that an Arahat should master (and experience) all the Jhanas or is there exception which means that Arahathood would be achieved only by Insight for example? KKT 18373 From: vehapphala Date: Tue Dec 31, 2002 3:45pm Subject: Re: [dsg] New Member --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Sarah wrote: > Hi Norm, > > Let me join Christine in welcoming you here and also to thank you for > introducing yourself;-) Thank you and Happy New Year to you, yours and all. > It sounds like you have some Thai and Pali knowledge - look forward to hearing more. Er, I am of the type that knows little so I may well be dangerous. >There are quite a few Thais here as well. Sure hope they have the patience that my American Thai friends have with me. .> Look f/w to more..let us know if you have any questions or problems making yourself at home here.... > > Sarah Thank you. Feel right home. Aaahhhhh... Norm 18374 From: Date: Tue Dec 31, 2002 4:37pm Subject: Way 32, Comm, Breathing "The Way of Mindfulness" by Soma Thera, The Section on Breathing, p.44 http://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/bps/misc/wayof.html The Contemplation of the Body The Section on Breathing Now the Blessed One, desirous of bringing about diverse kinds of attainments of distinction in beings by the Discourse on the Arousing of Mindfulness, began to teach the analytically explanatory portion [niddesavara] with the word "And how o bhikkhus." He did that after dividing into four the one mindfulness that is right [ekameva sammasatim] by way of the contemplation on the body, on feelings, on consciousness, and on mental objects. The Blessed One's exposition of the Arousing of Mindfulness is similar to the action of a worker in mat and basket weaving who wishing to make coarse and fine mats, boxes, cases, and the like, should make those goods after getting a mammoth bamboo, splitting it into four, and reducing each of the parts to strips. Idha bhikkhave bhikkhu = "Here, o bhikkhus, a bhikkhu." "Here": In this Dispensation of the Buddha which provides the basis for the person producing body-contemplation in all modes. By the word "here", dispensations other than the Buddha's are excluded as they do not teach body-contemplation in the complete way it is taught in the Buddhadhamma. For this is said: "Here is the recluse; untenanted by recluses are the other, opposing ways of thought." [Tika] "The person producing body-contemplation in all modes." As sects outside the Buddha's Dispensation also produce a part of this contemplation, by their words, the Buddha's disciple's complete knowledge or all-round grasp of this contemplation, when it is practiced by him, is told. Araññagato va... suññagaragato va = "Gone to the forest... or to an empty place." By this, here is the making clear of the getting of an abode appropriate to the meditator for the culture of mindfulness. The mind of the meditator which for a long time (before he became a recluse) had dwelt on visual and other objects, does not like to enter the road of meditation and just like a wild young bull yoked to a cart, runs off the road. A cowherd wishing to tame a wild calf nourished entirely on the milk of a wild cow, ties that calf, after leading it away from the cow, to a stout post firmly sunk in the ground, at a spot set apart for it. That calf, having jumped hither and thither, and finding it impossible to run away from here, will crouch down or lie down at that very post. Even so, must the bhikkhu who is desirous of taming the wild mind nourished long on the tasty drink of visible and other objects tie that mind to the post of the object of mindfulness-arousing with the rope of remembrance, after leading the mind from visible and other objects and ushering it into a forest, to the foot of a tree or into an empty place. The mind of the bhikkhu will also jump hither and thither. Not obtaining the objects it had long grown used to, and finding it impossible to break the rope of remembrance and run away, it will finally sit or lie down at that very object by way of partial and full absorption. Therefore, the men of old said: As one who wants to break a wild young calf Would tether it to stout stake firmly, here, In the same way the yogi should tie fast To meditation's object his own mind. In this way this abode becomes appropriate in the meditator. Therefore, it is said, "This (namely, the passage beginning with the words, 'Gone to the forest...') is the making clear of an abode appropriate to the meditator for the culture of mindfulness." 18375 From: christine_forsyth Date: Tue Dec 31, 2002 4:56pm Subject: Re: My Conclusions On Nibbana (Long) Hi KKT, Good question. I personally have no experience of arahatship either way. What do you think? And do you have any knowledge of what the Buddha said about this? metta, Christine > > KKT: Thank you for this info. > > BTW, do you think that an Arahat > should master (and experience) > all the Jhanas or is there exception > which means that Arahathood would > be achieved only by Insight for example? > > > KKT 18376 From: Date: Tue Dec 31, 2002 4:02pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Happy New Year and No Need to Agree..... Happy New Year everyone. And may we all remember to notice the passing of whatever the present moment may bring. Larry 18377 From: Kom Tukovinit Date: Tue Dec 31, 2002 5:40pm Subject: RE: RE: [dsg] Re: Anatta - View of some scholars Dear Larry, > -----Original Message----- > From: LBIDD@w... [mailto:LBIDD@w...] > IMO nibbana is the end of belief in a self. Saying "the end of > belief in a self" is the "true self" or is not self doesn't make sense, > either way. From paramatha perspective, because Nibbana has its own (unconditioned) characteristics which is uncontrollable, it too is non-self. > However, I think the idea of such a thing > could be used in such a way as to end the belief in a self and this > would not be incompatible with satipatthana. But it would take some very > high level experimentation to test such a theory. > Not to mention high level of wisdom and long accumulation!!!, since only an ariyan directly knows if Nibbana is self or not! Thanks for the interesting thread, Larry: a very good New Year gift for me! kom 18378 From: Date: Tue Dec 31, 2002 1:30pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: My Conclusions On Nibbana (Long) The possible problem with trying to interpret this translation and putting too much significance on the term "unbounded" is that in other translations Ananda is simply saying that -- "the lord has passed away." So, if the question is merely the death moment of the Buddha, Ananda merely thinks the Buddha has died at a point that he hasn't yet. The "spiritual attainment" of the Buddha is not the issue in this case. Then Ven. Ananda said to Ven. Anuruddha, "Ven. Anuruddha,[8] the Blessed One is totally unbound." "No, friend Ananda. The Blessed One isn't totally unbound. He has entered the cessation of perception & feeling." Then the Blessed One, emerging from the cessation of perception & feeling, entered the dimension of neither perception nor non- perception. Emerging from that, he entered the dimension of nothingness... the dimension of the infinitude of consciousness... the dimension of the infinitude of space... the fourth jhana... the third... the second... the first jhana. Emerging from the first jhana he entered the second... the third... the fourth jhana. Emerging from the fourth jhana, he immediately was totally Unbound." TG 18379 From: christine_forsyth Date: Tue Dec 31, 2002 7:27pm Subject: Re: Way 32, Comm, Breathing Hello to the Way corner study group, (I finally found my Way of Mindfulness book, which is much easier to carry than the reams I had printed off the internet.) Intending to become more conscientious, I may ask what has already been answered, so please don't banish me to read over all the old posts again Larry. :-) I won't go! The portion posted is explaining "And how, o bhikkus, does a bhikkhu live contemplating the body in the body?" "Here, o bhikkhus, a bhikkhu, gone to the forest, to the foot of a tree, or to an empty place ..." This seems to be about a bhikkhu (I am presuming we are all covered in this sutta under the term bhikkhu?) who has gone someplace for a special purpose. It doesn't seem to be a bhikkhu who is wandering about the countryside in a pre-occupied way, or is going about his daily business. He hasn't gone to join ten or fifteen or twenty others sitting in a circle on their cushions, with the hour long session culminating in tea, biscuits and chat. I don't believe from what the sutta says that the Buddha is encouraging a congregational performance of the satipatthana, or communal meditation, or even mindfulness amid the distractions of ordinary daily life. The bhikkhu is specifically described as having gone to a private place to remain alone, to meditate. I understand only too well that we cannot live the lives of recluses when we have family obligations, accommodation and food to provide, and particularly when we live in a culture that doesn't support people who would follow such inclinations. But the feeling I get from this teaching thus far, is that this practice of satipatthana is a serious undertaking, not an interest or pastime. To whatever degree we are capable of, we should simplify our lives and relationships, and conscientiously strengthen our Sila, while practicing it. What do you reckon? metta, Christine --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, LBIDD@w... wrote: > "The Way of Mindfulness" by Soma Thera, The Section on Breathing, p.44 > http://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/bps/misc/wayof.html > > The Contemplation of the Body > > The Section on Breathing 18380 From: Date: Tue Dec 31, 2002 3:05pm Subject: Re: My Conclusions On Nibbana (Long) Hello Howard, all What do you mean by "unconditioned" in the context of the below? Not bound to "The All" by the three poisons? Something more/else? >If the 12 pairs, together, are, indeed, as the sutta "The All" states, >all that there is, yet they are all conditioned and nibbana is the >unconditioned (so that nibbana cannot, as I said, be among them) then there >would appear to be an outright contradiction. The solution, it would seem to >me, is Nagarjuna's solution. Nibbana is the way things actually are, and it >is the way they appear when the three poisons are fully uprooted and there is >no distortion. Samsara is the way things appear under the yoke of >afflictions, under the spell of ignorance and the slavery of craving and >aversion. I agree with your post. Here's a passage from Winston King The existential nature of Buddhist ultimates where he gives very similar (I think) definitions of other Mahayana terms more or less synonymous with nibbana, or aspects of nibbana: Here we may observe that this same experiential unitive emptiness informs many another Mahaayaana term of the more basic sort. "No-mind'' is the experience of an instant, almost-instinctive alertness and response to the flowing situational currents about one, freed from the constraints of the idee fixe or intellectual constructs. "The Buddha Mind'' is universal-mind or universalmindedness which has overcome the limits of merely individual mind--positive-anattaa we might call it. "All is Mind" is the experience of experiencing in one's own private awareness the infinity of the universe with no sense of mental versus material essences incommunicably separated, and without the confinement or obstruction of individual-minded finitude... "Suchness" is the world of entities experienced immediately in their own intrinsic quality without the P.270 interposition of culturally conditioned thought-frames and personal value-references--the Mahaayaana form of "bare attention." The Hua-yen doctrine of "Totality" is a mystical sense of organic involvement in, and oneness with, the totality of reality, of the limitless extension of the self. In a word, all of these at least semiontological-metaphysical, or seemingly ontological-metaphysical terms, also and perhaps primarily, indicate experiences of the bursting open of confined subjective (subject-object) consciousness of the universe, of the underlying organic oneness of self and that universe, and of the emptiness of those distinctions which ordinarily set one entity apart from another. With the absence of self the subject-object duality ceases (moha), as does dosa and lobha, which are the self's way of relating to the world. (BTW, all the experiences described are actually experienced by people; I don't think they're even that uncommon. Apparently unlike nibbana. Stabilizing the perception and actualizing it, realizing it in one's life is something else again. That sort of perfect and unfailing awareness is my definition of nibbana.) metta, stephen 18381 From: rjkjp1 Date: Tue Dec 31, 2002 9:27pm Subject: Re: Way 32, Comm, Breathing In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "christine_forsyth " wrote: The portion posted is explaining "And how, o bhikkus, does a bhikkhu > live contemplating the body in the body?" "Here, o bhikkhus, a > bhikkhu, gone to the forest, to the foot of a tree, or to an empty > place ..." > This seems to be about a bhikkhu (I am presuming we are all covered > in this sutta under the term bhikkhu?) ______________________ Dear Christine, In the Abhidhamma the commentary to the Vibhanga (p273 Dispeller of delusion) indicates that although the Buddha often specifies the Bhikkhus with such words as "here a bhikkhu" (because they are the senior community, the most fertile field) the discourse are also addressed to the Bhikkhuni , and laypeople. "Or, alternatively he also spoke thus to show that state of the Bhikkhu through practice. For he who has entered upon this way is called a Bhikkhu, whether he be diety or human, is counted as a Bhikkhu according as it is said: "although adorned (as a layman/woman) yet if he walks in calm, In peace and tamed....A monk is he, a brahman and a bhikkhu(Dhammapada 142) _________________________________________ who has gone someplace for a > special purpose. It doesn't seem to be a bhikkhu who is wandering > about the countryside in a pre-occupied way, or is going about his > daily business. .... I don't believe from > what the sutta says that the Buddha is encouraging a congregational > performance of the satipatthana, or communal meditation, or even > mindfulness amid the distractions of ordinary daily life. _____________________ I think whatever we read is interpreted according to our views. I read this differently. The Buddha said in another place to the monks that he had given them the roots of trees to live at; and that any other place should be seen as an extra –but still allowable. Thus for monks it is their place of dwelling. We can think about going to live in the forest and believe that by that act we will be closer to Dhamma. But what is closer than right now? Bhikkhu Dhammadharo said: "Wisdom, panna, gets beyond words, beyond thinking about states, positions, ideas about a self or a whole, and it sees reality without thinking. Because the function of panna is not thinking, its function is to see clearly, to penetrate that which we mistake for "sitting". We mistakenly think that a person is sitting. We have the wrong idea of "I am sitting". Anatta is the core of the Buddha's teaching, not atta, self." http://www.abhidhamma.org/be%20here% 20now.htm > The bhikkhu is specifically described as having gone to a private > place to remain alone, to meditate. > .... But the feeling I get > from this teaching thus far, is that this practice of satipatthana is > a serious undertaking, not an interest or pastime. --------------------- What does it mean to be serious? Usually we make efforts to make things different from what they are, try to improve the situation or ourselves. I think it is what we have always done, the heart of samsara vatta. But isn't effort of the eightfold path something different than that? I think it is about seeing whatever is, as it is - however pleasant or unpleasant or neutral that may be. RobertK To whatever degree > we are capable of, we should simplify our lives and relationships, > and conscientiously strengthen our Sila, while practicing it. > What do you reckon? > > metta, > Christine 18382 From: Date: Tue Dec 31, 2002 9:43pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Way 32, Comm, Breathing Hi Christine, Yes "bhikkhu" includes us. See Way 20: Further, when that highest kind of person, the bhikkhu, is reckoned, the rest too are reckoned, as in regard to a royal procession and the like, when the king is reckoned, by the reckoning of the king, the retinue is reckoned. Also the word "bhikkhu" was used by the Buddha to point out the bhikkhu-state through practice of the teaching in this way: "He who practices this practice of the Arousing of Mindfulness is called a bhikkhu." He who follows the teaching, be he a shining one [deva] or a human, is indeed called a bhikkhu. Accordingly it is said: "Well-dressed one may be, but if one is calm, Tamed, humble, pure, a man who does no harm To aught that lives, that one's a brahman true. An ascetic and mendicant too." L: I think this quote addresses the tenor of the rest of your characterization as well. In this section we are being advised to seclude ourself away from worldly distractions for the purpose of taming the mind by tieing that mind "to the post of the object of mindfulness-arousing with the rope of remembrance." I think the general flavour of the commentary, so far, has been one of accomodating different kinds of people with different kinds of practice. Although the practice is always only satipatthana. So I think it is up to us to see what fits and to see the common thread. Happy New Year, Larry 18383 From: phamdluan2000 Date: Tue Dec 31, 2002 10:06pm Subject: Re: My Conclusions On Nibbana (Long) Dear Christine, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "christine_forsyth " wrote: Hi KKT, Good question. I personally have no experience of arahatship either way. What do you think? And do you have any knowledge of what the Buddha said about this? metta, Christine KKT: From the books I read, it's possible to achieve Arahathood << exclusively >> with Insight (i.e. without Jhanas) But I don't know whether this way is more difficult than the other? Metta, KKT ============ > > KKT: Thank you for this info. > > BTW, do you think that an Arahat > should master (and experience) > all the Jhanas or is there exception > which means that Arahathood would > be achieved only by Insight for example? 18384 From: Date: Tue Dec 31, 2002 6:05pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: My Conclusions On Nibbana (Long) Hi, Stephen - In a message dated 12/31/02 11:06:35 PM Eastern Standard Time, oreznoone@a... writes: > Hello Howard, all > > What do you mean by "unconditioned" in the context of the below? Not bound > to > "The All" by the three poisons? Something more/else? > ========================= Mainly that - free of any self/essence/core, and free of all craving, aversion, and attachment, but a bit more as well. Also unconditioned in the sense of not arising from conditions, volitional or other, nor comprised of conditions - uncompounded, unmade. With metta, Howard /Thus is how ye shall see all this fleeting world: A star at dawn, a bubble in a stream, a flash of lightning in a summer cloud, a flickering lamp, a phantom, and a dream./ (From the Diamond Sutra) 18385 From: christine_forsyth Date: Tue Dec 31, 2002 11:42pm Subject: [dsg] Re: Way 32, Comm, Breathing Thanks for this Larry, :-) Happy New Year to you and yours, Christine --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, LBIDD@w... wrote: > I think the general flavour of the commentary, so far, has been one of > accomodating different kinds of people with different kinds of practice. > Although the practice is always only satipatthana. So I think it is up > to us to see what fits and to see the common thread. > > Happy New Year, Larry 18386 From: christine_forsyth Date: Tue Dec 31, 2002 11:45pm Subject: Re: Way 32, Comm, Breathing Dear Robert, You write: "I think whatever we read is interpreted according to our views. I read this differently. The Buddha said in another place to the monks that he had given them the roots of trees to live at; and that any other place should be seen as an extra –but still allowable. Thus for monks it is their place of dwelling. We can think about going to live in the forest and believe that by that act we will be closer to Dhamma. But what is closer than right now?" ---------------------- CF: I agree that we interpret what we read according to our view - but, having happily been a formal meditator for some years, and having happily not been a formal meditator for this past year and a bit, I don't think that I have any fixed view on this other than the words of the Sutta and the explanation of the Commentator. He says "In this way this abode becomes appropriate to the meditator. Therefore, it is said, "This (namely, the passage beginning with the words, 'Gone to the forest ...') is the making clear of an abode appropriate to the meditator for the culture of mindfulness." And further along - not to pre-empt the next portion to be posted, it says - "Because the subject of meditation of mindfulness on in-and- out-breathing is not easy to accomplish without leaving the neighbourhood of a village, owing to sound, which is a thorn to absorption; and because in a place not become a township it is easy for the meditator to lay hold of this subject of meditation, the Blessed One, pointing out the abode suitable for that, spoke the words, "Gone to the forest," and so forth." ---------------------- RK: What does it mean to be serious? Usually we make efforts to make things different from what they are, try to improve the situation or ourselves. I think it is what we have always done, the heart of samsara vatta. But isn't effort of the eightfold path something different than that? I think it is about seeing whatever is, as it is - however pleasant or unpleasant or neutral that may be. --------------------- CF: 'To be serious' means to me that the Dhamma becomes purposely integrated in the whole of one's life. That attempting to follow the Buddha's teachings means just that, for every minute. The right meaning of the Suttas is of paramount importance to developing Right View don't you think? Which is why we are studying the Satipatthana Sutta with its commentary by Soma Thera. I am very willing to see whatever is, as it is - whether pleasant or unpleasant or neutral. It is the search for truth and reality that brings people to Buddhism. To me living as a Buddhist MUST be different from the way a person lives who hasn't known the Dhamma, what point is there to go on in just the same way as before? Why did the Buddha teach Sila if we were not expected to change our behaviour to conform to a minimum standard? My understanding is that Right Effort comes after the purification of conduct by R. Speech, R. Action and R. Livelihood. Right Effort, I think, means whatever it takes to prevent new unwholesome states from arising and to eradicate existing unwholesome mental states, and to encourage not yet existing wholesome mental states and to maintain current wholesome mental states. But as I'm no longer sure what R. Livelihood is after the posts of the last week so I could be wrong about right effort. Many things no longer seem to be straight-forward, just what the Buddha's words say. There seems to be hidden meanings, so I guess I'm confused. metta, Christine --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "rjkjp1 " wrote: > In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "christine_forsyth > " wrote: > The portion posted is explaining "And how, o bhikkus, does a > bhikkhu > > live contemplating the body in the body?" "Here, o bhikkhus, a > > bhikkhu, gone to the forest, to the foot of a tree, or to an empty > > place ..." 18387 From: rjkjp1 Date: Wed Jan 1, 2003 0:21am Subject: Re: Way 32, Comm, Breathing --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "christine_forsyth " wrote: > Dear Robert, > > > CF: I agree that we interpret what we read according to our view - > but, having happily been a formal meditator for some years, and > having happily not been a formal meditator for this past year and a > bit, I don't think that I have any fixed view on this other than > the words of the Sutta and the explanation of the Commentator. He > says "In this way this abode becomes appropriate to the meditator. > Therefore, it is said, "This (namely, the passage beginning with the > words, 'Gone to the forest ...') is the making clear of an abode > appropriate to the meditator for the culture of mindfulness." And > further along - not to pre-empt the next portion to be posted, it > says - "Because the subject of meditation of mindfulness on in- and- > out-breathing is not easy to accomplish without leaving the > neighbourhood of a village, owing to sound, which is a thorn to > absorption; and because in a place not become a township it is easy > for the meditator to lay hold of this subject of meditation, the > Blessed One, pointing out the abode suitable for that, spoke the > words, "Gone to the forest," and so forth." > ---------------------- Dear Christine, Thanks for pointing this out. I didn't realise that it was specifically for those who are developing anapanasati. In that case it is certain that one must be secluded for it to succeed. This object is suitable only for those who have special accumulations according to the commentaries. _________ > RK: What does it mean to be serious? Usually we make efforts to make > things different from what they are, try to improve the situation or > ourselves. I think it is what we have always done, the heart of > samsara vatta. But isn't effort of the eightfold path something > different than that? I think it is about seeing whatever is, as it > is - however pleasant or unpleasant or neutral that may be. > --------------------- > CF: 'To be serious' means to me that the Dhamma becomes purposely > integrated in the whole of one's life. That attempting to follow the > Buddha's teachings means just that, for every minute. The right > meaning of the Suttas is of paramount importance to developing Right > View don't you think? Which is why we are studying the Satipatthana > Sutta with its commentary by Soma Thera. > I am very willing to see whatever is, as it is - whether pleasant or > unpleasant or neutral. It is the search for truth and reality that > brings people to Buddhism. > To me living as a Buddhist MUST be different from the way a person > lives who hasn't known the Dhamma, what point is there to go on in > just the same way as before? ________________ This is different from how I see it. To me the life of a person who is interested in Dhamma is just like anyone else. It is just seeing, hearing, tasting, touching, thinking with lobha(attachment) , dosa (aversion) and ignorance. But because of hearing Dhamma there may be a touch more understanding of these realities. ___________________ Why did the Buddha teach Sila if we were > not expected to change our behaviour to conform to a minimum standard? > My understanding is that Right Effort comes after the purification of > conduct by R. Speech, R. Action and R. Livelihood. Right Effort, I > think, means whatever it takes to prevent new unwholesome states > from arising and to eradicate existing unwholesome mental states, > and to encourage not yet existing wholesome mental states and to > maintain current wholesome mental states. > _____________________ I think there is right effort when there is the knowing of the characteristic of a dhamma in the present moment. This can occur to anyone who has considered wisely, whether they are soldier or butcher, living in the forest, or at home with children and wives. When we have an ideal that we must follow the Buddha's teaching at every minute this sounds sincere but first we have to be clear what the path is. Otherwise something out of the ordinary, some type of forcing may be what we are doing. We may be overlooking subtle clinging that has to be known. I think the way of Dhamma is so natural that we can't tell anyone else how to live and no one can know who has understanding by looking at their lifestyle. RobertK 18388 From: christine_forsyth Date: Wed Jan 1, 2003 2:07am Subject: Arahathood without Jhana? was (Re: My Conclusions On Nibbana (Long) Hi KKT, and all, Here are some articles on Vipassana and discussing the place of Jhana: Access & Fixed Concentration Ven. Sujiva http://mail.metta.lk/mirror/www.quantrum.com.my/bwc/vtribune/vt4n2p6.h tml Attaining Jhana before one does Vipassana? Ven. Visuddhacara http://mail.metta.lk/mirror/www.quantrum.com.my/bwc/vtribune/vt3n2p4.h tml Vipassana & Jhana: What The Masters say Ven Visuddhacara http://mail.metta.lk/mirror/www.quantrum.com.my/bwc/vtribune/vt4n2p14. html You may have to cut and paste the links into Google if they are too long to link directly from this post. metta, Christine --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "phamdluan2000 " wrote: > KKT: From the books I read, > it's possible to achieve > Arahathood << exclusively >> > with Insight (i.e. without Jhanas) > > But I don't know whether this way > is more difficult than the other? > > > Metta, > > > KKT 18389 From: James Date: Wed Jan 1, 2003 2:42am Subject: [dsg] Re: Anatta - View of some scholars --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, LBIDD@w... wrote: > Hi Kom, > > You wrote: > > "On the other hand, if I were to come from a point where I think nibbana > is an unconditioned consciousness, then it would be easy for me to think > that with all the conditioned consciousness stripped out, what remains > is the true self, even if it might not be a distinct self. Don't you > think?" > > L: Yes, I agree. Someone asked the Buddha if consciousness is the self > and he said no. As far as I know, no one asked about an unconditioned > consciousness. Perhaps someone could argue from a position of yogic > insight that there is an unconditioned consciousness and because it is > unconditioned it satisfies the basic requirements of "self" in being not > impermanent, reliable and good (sat, chit, ananda). However, even though > this yogin would argue there is an unconditioned consciousness and it is > self, I don't think he would say this unconditioned consciousness is > nibbana. IMO nibbana is the end of belief in a self. Saying "the end of > belief in a self" is the "true self" or is not self doesn't make sense, > either way. > > Incidentally, since the Buddha divided reality into khandhas and > nibbana, I think it is reasonable to assume he didn't see an > unconditioned consciousness. However, I think the idea of such a thing > could be used in such a way as to end the belief in a self and this > would not be incompatible with satipatthana. But it would take some very > high level experimentation to test such a theory. > > Larry Hi Kom, Larry, and Howard, I have often written that I believe `Nibbana' is to abandon conditioned mind and become pure mind. In other words, ultimate reality is consciousness without the conditioning of duality; or unconditioned consciousness…also called `store consciousness' (alaya- vijana). This puts many people up-in-arms; especially Suan (who I haven't seen posting lately) because it runs counter to the Abhidhamma and is elucidated in a sutta contained within the Mahayana school of Buddhism; however terms such as `self' and `non- self' or `individual' and `universal' don't apply to this state because those are ideas stemming from dualistic thinking. Howard, I believe the thinking that Nibbana and Samsara are exactly the same thing stem from this sutta as well. Hard to explain with dualistic thinking, but Nibbana and Samsara are the same thing, but ignorance, karma, and craving, through sensory input, makes the unenlightened not experience reality properly. Since this if off-topic for this list, I won't go into it a great deal. You can download the entire sutta, The Lankavatara Sutta, which is several chapters long, in pdf format at this link: http://www.darkzen.com/downloads/The%20Lankavatara%20Sutra.pdf Here is an interesting excerpt from it; along the lines that we have been discussing: "With thy perfect intelligence and compassion which are beyond all limit, thou comprehendest the ego-lessness of things and persons, and art free and clear from the hindrances of passion and learning and egoism. Thou doest not vanish into Nirvana, nor does Nirvana abide in thee, for Nirvana transcends all duality of knowing and known, of being and non-being." Metta, James Ps. Sarah and Jon, I only bring up this Mahayana source because it is related to the topic we have been discussing. I hope that is okay. p.p.s Happy New Year to All 18390 From: Sarah Date: Wed Jan 1, 2003 4:09am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Yasodhara Hi Peter, (Chris, Rob Edd & all), Rather jumbled comments below: --- "peterdac4298 " CF:> > As well, I think I might try to obtain "Dictionary of Pali Proper > > Names", G.P.Malalasekera, Pali Text Society, 1974, Vol II - Sarah > > mentioned it once before as well. Thank you. P:> You may as well get both volumes while you are at it, as they are > quite cheep, maybe ukp15 each or so. Unless of course you are > restricted for shelf space, they are quite large! ..... Peter, I have to tell you - you're out of date on this point;-) I used to have the dict in 2 volumes (from a 2nd hand book-shop in London in the 1970s and loved dearly). One of the vols quite disintegrated with the help of some insects and we tried to replace it a couple of yrs ago. It is now produced in 3 volumes and wonderful as they are, they are NOT cheap. Just checked, 101pounds to be exact in the latest catalogue. A wonderful investment and Christine would get very good use from them. Just don’t let the bugs get a taste;-) ..... I’ve just read your article and notes on Rahulamata/Yasodhara and I think it’s a really well-researched and beautiful piece of work. I checked a few details and it all seems very accurate as far as I know. I note that the comment about Rahulamata's death at 78 and that of the 18,000 arahat nuns given, comes from the Apadana. I'm not sure that this has ever been translated into English and in the PTS catalogue it mentions the Pali version is no longer available there, although it seems the Pali commentary on the first 3 sections is. I’m very interested in the notes and references that Rob Edd gives. We don’t have either of the books he mentions for the translation of the verses, but perhaps someone else has. (Robert - v.glad to hear from you and hope the Icelandic fishing companies can spare you from time to time for brief comments - I’d be v.interested to hear any of yr comments on the ‘Dhamma Issues’ series Nina is translating and adding notes to, for example). ***** OK, I've just checked the entry for the Apadana in the dictionary too. It is the 13th division of the Khuddakanikaya and contains 547 biographies of monks and 40 of nuns at the time of the Buddha. It says that most the stories are found in the Paramatthadipani, the commentary to the Thera and Therigatha. The Apadana and its commentary (Visuddhajanavilaasinii) may have been translated into Thai and is probably available in Burmese and Pali elsewhere. Perhaps Kom, Suan or others know more. There seem to be other (Theravada) sources substantiating the details of her going forth and becoming an arahant and so on. As I said, I think your (Peter’s) research with extra notes and details is really great. Any comments I make are mere nit-picking. In note (8) you mentioned her powers ‘...were more like the psychic gifts that some people even to day might have’. I don’t think so.In the commentary note to AN Bk of Ones, Women disciples (1-25), where she is identified with Bhaddakaccana as chief among the nuns who attained supernormal powers (mahaabhi~n~nappattaana.m), the PTS translation gives: "Of one Buddha four disciples only have great abnormal powers. The remainder can recall 100,000 kalpas, not beyond that: but those who have attained great abnormal powers can recall incalculable eras. Under our Teacher's rule the two Great Disciples and the elder Bakkula and Bhaddakaccana, just these four had this power". You had mentioned this note and these four disciples. I think these powers are a rather more than ‘quite impressive’;-) ***** In the MrsRhys Davids transl of the Thera-Theri-gatha (as opposed to the Norman version) it gives a transl of the commentary before the verses. For Sundari-Nanda, after aeons and aeons after hearing Pudumuttara Buddha preaching, she was also reborn in the same family as Yasodhara, her sister. We read that as the Buddha (her half-brother), Rahula, his son, her brother, King Nanda, her mother, Mahapajapati and her sister, Rahula’s mother had all gone forth, she followed from ‘love of her kin’. However, she was intoxicated by her own beauty. After listening to the Buddha talk on the foul and the impermanent, she eventually became an arahant too. Anyway, the point was that here is another indication that Rahulamata had gone forth and so on. No suggestions of having died young. One or two other small comments: “In those mysogynistic days” (in note 14) - within the Sangha...?? In a post to Chris, you wrote: “I think this may indicate the depth of anguish that the Boddhisatva must have been suffering in that moment. It may provide some indication of the motivational power that would drive him through all the trials that were to follow. Maybe Yasodhara understood this?” ..... Have you any support to show any ‘depth of anguish’ he suffered or for this comment? Just curious. Thanks again. What other pieces do you have up your sleeve and I’m also curious about why your non-buddhist musical friend was so interested in the details of Rahulamata????? What did he do with it? (sorry if I’ve missed the explanation). I was also curious about your comment about their being no reference to the bhikkhunis after the Buddha's parinibbana. I'm wondering whether references to bhikkhus before the 1st council. When we read about the buddha's body first being honoured by women because they were weeping (which Ananda was chastised for allowing), would this not have included bhikkhunis I wonder. Maybe also some of the references to the large numbers of bhikkhus present?? Sarah ===== 18391 From: James Date: Wed Jan 1, 2003 4:26am Subject: [dsg] Re: Yasodhara --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Sarah wrote: When we read about the > buddha's body first being honoured by women because they were weeping > (which Ananda was chastised for allowing) Hi Sarah (and All), Ven. Ananda was the most chastised, ridiculed, and un-respected bhikkhu of the Buddha's monks; and yet the Buddha and him were inseparable, he had a respect/understanding for women beyond his time and culture, and he is responsible for passing along almost the entirety of the Buddha's teachings. He was a paradox and a greatly misunderstood individual. For some reason, I feel an affinity for him ;-). Do you know of any good books or articles written about him? Metta, James 18392 From: Sarah Date: Wed Jan 1, 2003 4:44am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Yasodhara Hi James, The wheel publication "Ananda" by Hellmuth Hecker includes lots of useful sutta quotes. I expect it's on line. Christine will be able to give you a comprehensive list of links/references in addition, I know;-). Was he misunderstood.....not at all sure. I think he was very highly respected and venerated, but will leave this to other 'misunderstoods' to consider further;-). Sarah ====== > Ven. Ananda was the most chastised, ridiculed, and un-respected > bhikkhu of the Buddha's monks; and yet the Buddha and him were > inseparable, he had a respect/understanding for women beyond his > time and culture, and he is responsible for passing along almost the > entirety of the Buddha's teachings. He was a paradox and a greatly > misunderstood individual. For some reason, I feel an affinity for > him ;-). Do you know of any good books or articles written about > him? > > Metta, James > 18393 From: James Date: Wed Jan 1, 2003 4:53am Subject: [dsg] Re: Yasodhara --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Sarah wrote: > Hi James, > > The wheel publication "Ananda" by Hellmuth Hecker includes lots of useful > sutta quotes. I expect it's on line. Christine will be able to give you a > comprehensive list of links/references in addition, I know;-). > > Was he misunderstood.....not at all sure. I think he was very highly > respected and venerated, but will leave this to other 'misunderstoods' to > consider further;-). > > Sarah > ====== Hi Sarah, :-) :-) Thanks for the information. And yes, he was highly misunderstood and chastised. I identify with him highly; as I am feeling more and more I should. Lookie here this instance...the hand that gives me something, also slaps me royally ;-) But don't worry about it, regardless of what the Abhidhamma states, none of this yahoo is real ;-). Metta, James 18394 From: abhidhammika Date: Wed Jan 1, 2003 4:54am Subject: One Nibbana, But Countless Buddhas Dear Dhamma friends, Happy New Year! There is exactly one and only one nibbana. But, there had been countless Buddhas and Arahants who had realized nibbana, and later achieved extinguishment. There will be countless Buddhas and Arahants in future as well, including me and many of you eithers as Buddhas or Arahants. While nibbana remains at all time, Buddhas and Arahants are time- bound sentient beings before they achieved extinguishment. With kind regards, Suan Lu Zaw http://www.bodhiology.org 18395 From: Sarah Date: Wed Jan 1, 2003 4:57am Subject: Re: [dsg] My Conclusions On Nibbana (Long) Hi Swee Boon (James & All), You wrote another 'Wow' post with lots of helpful references, all snipped for now: --- "nidive " wrote: > Hi James (if you care to listen - warning - contains Abhidhamma > stuff), Sarah and Others who are interested, > > Earlier on, I said that I was convinced that nibbana cannot be > described. After re-reading and re-ponderance, I regret to say that > I remain unconvinced that nibbana cannot be described. ..... I think if you look at your references, those which suggest nibbana cannot be defined or described in anyway are referring to parinibbana and the final cessation of the khandhas. ..... > My conclusion is that nibbana is to be known and seen as it is. When > nibbana is known and seen as it is, at death, the arahant goes to an > end that cannot be classified by virtue of being non-existent. An > arahant is not nibbana. ..... I agree with this. I think the distinctions made in the sutta references, however, are between nibbana and parinibbana, rather than nibbana and the arahant. This may be just a small quibble and I may have missed a point, but I think it explains why in some references (eg the Udana and AN ones you gave) there is plenty of detail and in others, like the ones about the fire going out, nothing further can be defined. Thanks to you both for these stimulating and helpful discussions and the many great sutta references you both provide. Sarah ======= 18396 From: abhidhammika Date: Wed Jan 1, 2003 5:28am Subject: Nibbana Is One Thing, And Samsara Is Another Thing Dear Dhamma friends Happy New Year! There are exactly Four Realities. They are matter, mind, mental associates and nibbana. Samsara is made up of matter, mind and mental associates. At another level, there are exactly Four Noble Truths. Samsara is made up of misery, attachment as the cause of misery, and the way leading to cessation of attachment and misery, which are called the Three Noble Truths while nibbana as the final cessation of misery is the other remaining Noble Truth, to make the Four Noble Truths. If one were to equate nibbana with samsara, one's action amounted to equating cessation of misery with misery, with attachment, and with the way leading to eradication of attachment and of misery. That type of confusing and attempting to confuse nibbana with samsara is the hallmark of intellectual backwardness typical of pre-Buddhist thinkers and modern un-Buddhist thinkers. Therefore, anyone who equated samsara with nibbana misunderstood the original teachings of Gotama the Historical Buddha at best, and misrepresented them at worst. Please keep in mind that Buddha called himself "Vibhajjavaadii", the one who teaches by analysis. In ancient India, Buddhists were called and known as Vibhajjavaadiis, the Analysts. With kind regards, Suan Lu Zaw http://www.bodhiology.org 18397 From: Sarah Date: Wed Jan 1, 2003 5:51am Subject: Re: [dsg] Happy New Year and No Need to Agree..... Hi Ray, Happy New Year too and many thanks for your kind comments and great reminders about 'admirable friends'....I find it helpful to be reminded over and over again: ..... > "When a monk has admirable friends, admirable companions, admirable > comrades, it is to be expected that he will get to hear at will, easily > & > without difficulty, talk that is truly sobering and conducive to the > opening > of awareness, i.e., talk on modesty, on contentment, on seclusion, on > non-entanglement, on arousing persistence, on virtue, on concentration, > on > discernment, on release, and on the knowledge & vision of release"--- ..... We'll keep you posted about the book,'Survey...'too. thanks again for all your support and helpful posts, Sarah ===== 18398 From: nidive Date: Wed Jan 1, 2003 6:48am Subject: Re: My Conclusions On Nibbana (Long) Hi James, > What is the difference between an arahant alive and an arahant dead? The difference is in the presence and absence of the five aggregates. Where the five aggregates are present, an arahant is said to be alive. Where the five aggregates are absent, an arahant is said to be dead. The five aggregates that are present are the result of old kamma. Though an arahant does not generate any new kamma, old kammas accumulated from the infinite past still continue to play themselves out for the rest of the life of the arahant. It is only at death that all old kamma are 'destroyed', ie. becomes no more. http://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/study/kamma.html "What is old kamma? The eye is to be seen as old kamma, fabricated & willed, capable of being felt. The ear... The nose... The tongue... The body... The intellect is to be seen as old kamma, fabricated & willed, capable of being felt. This is called old kamma. "And what is new kamma? Whatever kamma one does now with the body, with speech, or with the intellect. This is called new kamma." [SN XXXV.145] The story of the Last Days and Death of one of the Buddha's Chief Disciple, Maha-Moggallana, serves as an example of old kammas playing themselves out while the arahant is still alive. http://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/bps/wheels/wheel263.html > What is the difference between nibbana and parinibbana > (total unbinding)? As it is to my understanding, there is a difference between nibbana and parinibbana. Nibbana is an 'ultimate reality' (as in Abhidhamma). Parinibbana is used to describe the similarity in properties (thinking-wise) that a dead arahant has with the 'ultimate reality' nibbana. Just as the 'ultimate reality' nibbana has the property of being free from the five aggregates (of rupa, citta and cetasika), so too the arahant who had died is finally free from the five aggregates (of rupa, citta and cetasika). Yet this does not mean that the dead arahant is or has become nibbana. http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/khuddaka/iti/iti2.html#44 This was said by the Blessed One, said by the Arahant, so I have heard: "Monks, there are these two forms of the Unbinding property. Which two? The Unbinding property with fuel remaining, & the Unbinding property with no fuel remaining. And what is the Unbinding property with fuel remaining? There is the case where a monk is an Arahant whose fermentations have ended, who has reached fulfillment, finished the task, laid down the burden, attained the true goal, destroyed the fetter of becoming, and is released through right gnosis. His five sense faculties still remain and, owing to their being intact, he is cognizant of the pleasant & the unpleasant, and is sensitive to pleasure & pain. His ending of passion, aversion, & delusion is termed the Unbinding property with fuel remaining.[1] And what is the Unbinding property with no fuel remaining? There is the case where a monk is an Arahant whose fermentations have ended, who has reached fulfillment, finished the task, laid down the burden, attained the true goal, destroyed the fetter of becoming, and is released through right gnosis. For him, all that is sensed, being unrelished, will grow cold right here. This is termed the Unbinding property with no fuel remaining."[2] Notes: 1, 2. With fuel remaining (sa-upadisesa) and with no fuel remaining (anupadisesa): The analogy here is to a fire. In the first case, the flames are out, but the embers are still glowing. In the second, the fire is so thoroughly out that the embers have grown cold. The "fuel" here is the five aggregates (see the Glossary). While the arahant is still alive, he/she still experiences the five aggregates, but they do not burn with the fires of passion, aversion, or delusion. When the arahant passes away, there is no longer any experience of aggregates here or anywhere else. The phrase "Unbinding property" suggests that it refers to the property of Unbinding and not Unbinding itself. "Unbinding property with no fuel remaining" refers to parinibbana. > If an arahant is free from the five aggregates, what could the > arahant be still bound to? I believe that the arahant is still > bound by samsara, but is actually nibbana. An arahant being nothing more than the five aggregates, when the five aggregates are put to rest and becomes no more, is there still any arahant to be bound to? Just as a flame that is snuffed out by the wind, can the flame which no longer exists anymore be bound to anything? To say that the flame can be bound to anything at all is superfluous. The flame doesn't exist anymore. > Why did he do this? I believe it is because he needed to release > the `illusion of samsara'; the illusion that others project onto > him as `a self'. Then, and only then, he could completely leave > the samsara existence. I believe he did this for two purposes: (1) to relief his physical pain (2) to demonstrate to the devas and brahmas who are sceptical that he indeed was the Buddha. For the cessation of perception and feeling cannot be attained by those who are not ariyans. And to attain the cessation of perception and feeling, one must go from Jhana 1 to 4, then the four immaterial jhanas. To emerge from the cessation of perception and feeling, the process is reversed. It should be noted that the cessation of perception and feeling is not nibbana and it does not experience anything, not even nibbana. For nibbana can only be experienced by means of cittas; in the cessation of perception and feeling, even cittas (consciousness) is stopped, though temporarily. (This is an explanation from Abhidhamma perspective.) http://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/modern/thanissaro/likefire/2- 1.html There is the case, Sandha, where for an excellent thorough-bred of a man the perception of earth with regard to earth has ceased to exist; the perception of liquid with regard to liquid... the perception of heat with regard to heat... the perception of wind with regard to wind... the perception of the dimension of the infinitude of space with regard to the dimension of the infinitude of space... the perception of the dimension of the infinitude of consciousness with regard to the dimension of the infinitude of consciousness... the perception of the dimension of nothingness with regard to the dimension of nothingness... the perception of the dimension of neither perception nor non-perception with regard to the dimension of neither perception nor non-perception... the perception of this world with regard to this world... the next world with regard to the next world... and whatever is seen, heard, sensed, cognized, attained, sought after, pondered by the intellect: the perception with regard even to that has ceased to exist. Absorbed in this way, the excellent thoroughbred of a man is absorbed dependent neither on earth, liquid, heat, wind, the dimension of the infinitude of space, the dimension of the infinitude of consciousness, the dimension of nothingness, the dimension of neither perception nor non-perception, this world, the next world; nor on whatever is seen, heard, sensed, cognized, attained, sought after or pondered by the intellect -- and yet he is absorbed. And to this excellent thoroughbred of a man, absorbed in this way, the gods, together with Indra, the Brahmas & their chief queens, pay homage even from afar: Homage to you, O thoroughbred man. Homage to you, O superlative man -- of whom we have no direct knowledge even by means of that with which you are absorbed. A XI.10 This sutta clearly shows that the Buddha attained the cessation of perception and feeling for the sake of the Brahmas who came to visit him from afar. In any case, the Buddha did EMERGE from the fourth jhana before he was unbound; meaning that when he was unbound, he was not absorbed in any jhana at all. Regards, NEO Swee Boon PS: An arahant is said to even transcend dispassion; nibbana. Why is that so? Because (at death), he is neither rupa, nor citta, nor cetasika, nor nibbana. 'He' simply doesn't exist anymore, just like the flame which was snuffed out does not exist anymore. 18399 From: phamdluan2000 Date: Wed Jan 1, 2003 7:10am Subject: Re: My Conclusions On Nibbana (Long) Dear Neo, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "nidive " wrote: < snip > PS: An arahant is said to even transcend dispassion; nibbana. Why is that so? Because (at death), he is neither rupa, nor citta, nor cetasika, nor nibbana. 'He' simply doesn't exist anymore, just like the flame which was snuffed out does not exist anymore. KKT: What is the difference between your interpretation and the << annihilationism, nothingness >> ? Is it the << craving for non-existence >> (vibhava-tanha) mentioned in the 2nd Noble Truth? Metta, KKT